Trans-Organizational Collaboration Models For Technical Solutions And Best Practice Development
Jeffrey R. Hale, Kleinfelder
ABSTRACT:
Modern knowledge management practice in the
information economy is important for knowledge-based and technical
enterprises. Knowledge management
literature has recently focused on intra-organizational collaboration. Knowledge management practices can be applied
to the next evolution of knowledge management: trans-organizational
collaboration in which client and consultant organizations collaborate to
develop technical solutions and best practices.
Client organizations that are prone to scanning the external environment
for ideas and practices are likely to collaborate effectively with consulting
organizations that practice an articulation style of communication. This relationship may result in a strong bond
between client and consultant organizations, resulting in mutual benefit and
stability that can be facilitated by electronic collaboration tools. Issues of intellectual property and quality
assurance / quality control should be considered and accounted for when new
models of trans-organizational collaboration are pursued
Keywords: Trans-organizational collaboration, Electronic collaboration tools, Parallel communities of practice, Knowledge management
1. Introduction
One prevalent theme within the body of literature concerning knowledge management is the associated benefits and challenges with intra-organizational knowledge management. Buckman (2004) and Bryan and Joyce (2007) emphasize the important competitive advantages modern thinking companies and knowledge driven organizations gain by adopting intra-organizational knowledge networks as part of the organizational structure in the 21st century, as opposed to hierarchical, top-down, command-and-control models that were successful during the industrial age. Buckman (2004) emphasizes that through knowledge networking, the knowledge-driven organization will result in effective engagement on the front line, meaning that those who interface with the client are effective, because they have ready access to trusted sources of knowledge within the organization. Bryan and Joyce (2007) use similar terminology, referring to frontline field commanders who mobilize mind power. This terminology refers to deploying knowledge where it is needed, at the client-consultant interface. However, this terminology also evokes an impression of an adversarial client-consultant relationship. This paper takes front-line knowledge deployment a step further by focusing on trans-organizational collaboration for technical solutions and best-practices among client and consultant organizations. This may be considered a form of an open system network (Bryan and Joyce, 2007). Such a model involves a more sophisticated client-consultant relationship with an element of partnership.
Specifically, the benefits and challenges associated with collaboration among the petrochemical industry (client) and engineering consulting firms (consultant) are evaluated. Corporations in both industries represent modern thinking companies, as described by Bryan and Joyce (2007), in which business success substantially relies upon technical solutions.
Bryan and Joyce (2007), cite leading petrochemical companies as being
successful in the implementation of intra-organizational
knowledge management activities. The
petrochemical industry has successfully integrated both informal and formal
knowledge networks within a necessary corporate hierarchy. In parallel fashion, Kleinfelder, a
2,500-person professional consulting firm throughout the
As a technical solutions provider to the petrochemical industry, Kleinfelder has participated in trans-organizational collaboration with the petrochemical industry. This type of collaboration transcends more typical concepts of intra-organizational knowledge management, as well as client-consultant relationships. This experience will serve as the basis for demonstrating the benefits and challenges of trans-organizational collaboration for technical solutions and best practice development.
2. Summary Of
Intra-Organizational Knowledge Management
Before exploring the collaboration dynamics among technically oriented organizations, it is important to provide a summary of intra-organizational (or closed-system networks), because it is assumed that the engaged organizations have achieved a certain degree of competence with internal knowledge management.
A knowledge management mechanism common to both the petrochemical industry and Kleinfelder is that of the community of practice. Such intra-organizational communities of practice facilitate the management, creation and exchange of tacit knowledge (Irick, 2007). Irick (2007; pp. 2)) notes specifically, “If managed effectively, the community of practice can be a rich, nurturing environment that can produce tangible, external results in an organization…”
Although the implementation of knowledge management has become more prevalent within business organizations, Alrawi (2007) notes that knowledge management is still a recent aspect of business culture. The impact of knowledge management remains to be explored within existing organizational structures, as well as to the organizations external relationships. Knowledge management and collaboration external to the organization are the focus of the following section.
Effective knowledge management within an organization depends considerably
on how the organization is arranged for the capture, transfer, and management
of knowledge. In the modern information
economy, it is important for technical/knowledge-based organizations to develop
innovative organizational structures to facilitate the cultivation of knowledge
within the organization. These concepts
are addressed by Grant (1998), Buckman (2004),
3 Trans-Organizational
Collaboration And Knowledge Transfer
Trans-organizational knowledge sharing with customers and business partners results in the mutual benefits of better customer service, more efficient delivery times, and more collaboration (Alrawi, 2007). This dynamic makes knowledge a commodity that can be exchanged for revenue or more knowledge (Alrawi, 2007). These concepts are characteristic of the trusted advisor relationship, in which the client organization relies upon the consulting organization for guidance, recommendations, and insight in addition to facts, figures, and designs. The trusted advisor relationship is an important element of trans-organizational collaboration, being both a requisite element for the process to occur, as well as a by-product of successful trans-organizational collaboration.
According to Irick (2007), managers should function as knowledge brokers who facilitate the transfer of knowledge both within and across communities. Once two organizations with a common interest (e.g., client and consultant) effectively transfer knowledge among their own communities of practice, it is reasonable that the next evolutionary step is transfer of knowledge and collaboration across communities of practice that exist in both organizations. The exchange of tacit knowledge among communities of practice residing in different (client and consultant) organizations may occur along various lines of communication, which may also be viewed as evolutionary. The characteristics of an ‘Adhocracy’ nonhierarchical coordination structure (Grant, 1998) are evident when this collaboration occurs to develop a unique technical solution or to develop a best practice. What is unique in this case is an adhocracy that forms across client and consultant organizations.
When parallel communities of practice exist within the two organizations, the natural first step toward trans-organizational collaboration involves the transfer of knowledge among those communities of practice that are organized around a common technical interest in each organization (Figure 1). This is supported by the conclusion of Gumus (2007) that knowledge is more comfortably exchanged within one’s community of practice. It is reasonable that when engaging in knowledge transfer and collaboration across organizations, it will be most comfortable to engage with a similar community of practice.
|
Client
Organization |
Consultant
Organization |
|
Regulatory Formal Network ß |
à Regulatory Practice Group |
|
Science Formal Network ß |
à Science Practice Group |
|
Engineering Formal Network ß |
à Engineering Practice Group |
|
Safety Formal Network ß |
à Safety Practice Group |
|
Figure 1: Trans-Organizational Collaboration
Among Parallel Communities Of Practice. |
|
Another collaborative model involves the communication of counterpart technical managers in each organization who can access and exchange information derived from all the various practice groups within respective organizations, affording more knowledge integration (Figure 2). The most evolved trans-organizational collaboration model involves communities of practice with differing technical interests collaborating across organizations to develop a unique and integrated solution or best practice (Figure 3).
|
Client
Organization |
Consultant
Organization |
||
|
Regulatory Formal Network |
|
Technical Manager |
Regulatory Practice Group |
|
Science Formal Network |
Science Practice Group |
||
|
Engineering Formal Network |
Engineering Practice Group |
||
|
Safety Formal Network |
Safety Practice Group |
||
|
Figure 2:
Technical Manager Mediated Trans-Organizational
Collaboration |
|||
|
Client
Organization |
Consultant
Organization |
|
|
Regulatory Practice Group |
|
|
Science Practice Group |
|
Engineering Formal Network |
Engineering Practice Group |
|
Safety Formal Network |
Safety Practice Group |
|
Figure 3:
Completely Networked Trans-Organizational
Collaboration |
|
Technical manager mediated and completely networked trans-organizational collaboration (Figures 2 and 3) represent architectural knowledge models. According to Grant (1998), architectural knowledge refers to knowing how to link together specialized knowledge from different fields. Completely networked trans-organizational collaboration (Figure 3) would realize the benefits of a self-organizing team, an organizational model usually associated with a single organization (Grant, 1998).
These models also assume a level of competence and sophistication has been achieved in each organization with regard to intra-organizational collaboration. These trans-organizational communication models are dominated by horizontal communications and knowledge transfer, even across organizations. These horizontal lines of communication are preferable to vertical organizational models that tend to inhibit free-flow of knowledge (Bryan and Joyce, 2007), and information does not have to go up the hierarchy before it comes back down to the intended recipients (Grant, 1998). These types of horizontal trans-organizational collaboration systems (Figures 1 through 3) are successful, because the participating individuals are managers, professionals, and player coaches, as defined by (Bryan and Joyce, 2007).
In thinking-intensive organizations, professionals are self-directed. Managers use their mental capacity to exercise authority, collaborate with, and refine the focus of knowledge workers through knowledge and influence, as opposed to formal authority applied with orders and instructions. Bryan and Joyce (2007) advance the concept of three leadership styles as recognized management roles within knowledge networks:
¨ A “player-coach.” as the name implies, is a team member who takes on an informal leadership role with peer level professionals;
¨ Formal communities of practice are lead by “servant leaders” who are responsive to the needs of the network and its members while being responsible for the success of the network. These individuals share accountability for performance, and exercise influence through inspiration and persuasion, as opposed to explicit authority granted by the organization;
¨ A “linchpin” is an individual within an informal network who serves as a hub for information exchange. This individual may be very valuable, but can also be a bottleneck or contribute to the collapse of the network when temporarily or permanently unavailable.
Variations of the roles defined above can be observed in the example trans-organizational collaboration models illustrated in Figures 1 through 3. The underlying assumption in Figures 1 through 3 is that communities of practice within the client and consulting organizations are led by a practice group servant leader who is also a player coach, and that the members of the communities of practice are thinking professionals. As such, these individuals may effectively engage, and collaborate with the client on the front line (Buckman, 2004). Figure 2 introduces the concept of a Technical Manager who serves as a servant leader among (opposed to within) communities of practice. The role of the technical manager is to coordinate technical contributions from multiple practice areas and facilitate collaboration within and across organizations. This role is consistent with the role of managers who manage tacit knowledge in organizations (Irick, 2007). Irick (2007; pp 5) states, “Managers should act as ‘knowledge brokers,’ contributing to the diffusion of knowledge across and between communities.” The role of the technical manager is also consistent with the idea of the frontline field commander (Bryan and Joyce, 2007). However, the technical manager’s role in the example models presented in Figures 1 through 3, is that of trans-organizational collaboration and not to coordinate an information barrage upon the client organization. Additionally, the technical manager in Figure 2 must be wary not to adopt the adverse characteristic of a bottleneck or linchpin: restricting the flow of information or causing the temporary collapse of the knowledge network. This individual should coordinate and promote collaboration. The technical manager may monitor communication among professionals in order that it may be coordinated, but the technical manager should not inhibit such communication, nor insist that it flow through the technical manager.
The trans-organizational collaboration model for client and consultant technical organizations can be described using the atomic model as a close analogy. The components of this analog consist of the organization (atom), consisting of a technical nucleus: techniques and methods (protons) held together by procedures and guidance (neutrons). Technical professionals represent the electrons, applying knowledge and expertise by bonding with internal and external organizations. More tacit knowledge and experience possessed by individuals is representative of the increased valence states of an electron. The trans-organizational collaboration model is best represented by a covalent bond at the molecular level: a strong bond created by sharing of electrons (knowledgeable people) with the client for mutual benefit and stability. The traditional model being more closely represented by an ionic bond: a weak bond created temporarily to satisfy complementary interests, and easily pulled apart by external forces. Refer to Grant (1998) for more natural analogs (biological and physical) to organizational structures and dynamic.
Effective collaboration and knowledge sharing among these groups may be contingent upon communication styles. According to Al-hawari (2007), different industries tend to have different knowledge management styles that may be categorized as adoption, systemization, standardization, and articulation. This is an important consideration when evaluating trans-organizational knowledge exchange and collaboration. Collaborating organizations from differing industries may have a common technical goal, and both may be committed to knowledge management within their organizations. However, their knowledge management styles may or may not be compatible or differing styles may complicate communications (Gumus, 2007).
In the case being examined in this paper, where an engineering consulting firm collaborates with a major petrochemical organization, potentially differing knowledge management styles appear to be compatible. The client petrochemical organization in this case desires to collaborate with external consultant partners, exhibiting deliberate scanning of the external environment for ideas and practices, which is characteristic of knowledge management in a material-based industry (Al-hawari, 2007). This complements the knowledge management characteristics of engineering consulting firms (service-based industry) which desire to achieve customer satisfaction through knowledge of technology and client communication, which define the ‘articulation’ style of knowledge management (Al-hawari, 2007). This trans-organizational dynamic involving client and consultant partners who engage in collective knowledge management differs from the conclusion of Gumus (2007) who concludes that sharing of knowledge and skills tends to be more prevalent within a group as opposed to among groups, which is based on an intra-organizational dynamic.
4. Collaboration Issues
Many mutual benefits may be realized from progressive client-consultant business models, such as trans-organizational collaboration in the modern economy. However, there exist potential issues associated with this relatively modern way of conducting business among technical enterprises that have yet to be resolved. Foreseeable collaboration issues include intellectual property, quality assurance / quality control, and liability. Two fundamental questions derive from these potential issues: 1) whose idea was it; and 2) who is responsible for the results? These issues are explored further in the following sections.
4.1. Intellectual Property Issues
The potential for intellectual property issues arises out of the various trans-organizational (and individual) arrangements configured for collaboration. Client and consultant communities of practice may collaborate non-contractually without monetary consideration toward a common objective with the understanding that both organizations benefit mutually from the knowledge developed and shared. The potential issue of intellectual property arises concerning which organization and/or individuals in that organization own the fruits of the collaborative effort, and if each organization is entitled to benefit from the knowledge gained through trans-organizational collaboration by applying it in other areas of the organization’s business. This issue may also extend to the intellectual property arrangements an individual in a community of practice may or may not have with the employing organization.
This issue is alleviated to some degree by contractual engagements in which the client provides the consultant monetary consideration for intellectual contributions to a research and development endeavor. In this more traditional case, the engineering consultant is compensated for knowledge provided to the client, and issues of intellectual property and non-disclosure are addressed within the contract.
The issue of intellectual property is magnified and complicated in situations in which the client desires to collaborate with multiple engineering consulting organizations who may be competitors in the intellectual business arena. Contractual arrangements are recommended in these circumstances.
4.2. Quality Assurance / Quality Control Issues
When a technical solution or best practice derives out of a trans-organizational collaborative effort, it is important to ensure that a mutually agreed upon quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) process is established, and that the collaborating organizations are prepared to adhere to the process and its outcome. The QA/QC policies of each organization should be compared and contrasted, as there may be inconsistencies. Such inconsistencies should be reconciled through the mutually agreed upon QA/QC process for the collaborative endeavor. It is also important to make clear who (organizations and individuals) will be responsible for executing the QA/QC process.
4.3. Liability
Issues
Questions regarding responsibility and liability will likely develop in cases in which technical solutions or best practices do not yield the desired result, or when expectations differ among the collaborating organizations. As with the intellectual property issue, concerns over potential liability are addressed through contractual collaborative arrangements. A non-contractual collaborative arrangement may also be formed to address this issue. For instance, the client organization may develop a technical solution or best practice to enhance its business, and consultant partners may be engaged to provide validation and quality input to the process. In this arrangement the client organization maintains responsibility for the solution and its outcomes while affording the consultant organization input to a new process or procedure to which the engineering consultant may be subject to in the future.
4.4. Collaboration
Tools
Various electronic collaboration tools exist to support trans-organizational collaboration among client and consultant organizations. Electronic collaboration tools that Kleinfelder has used internally and in collaboration with the petrochemical industry include, 1) project-dedicated websites, 2) electronic discussion boards, 3) web-based interactive tools, and 4) video conferencing. These methods of electronic collaboration are evaluated in this section. Buckman (2004) addresses many of the benefits and limitations of these types of tools (e.g., threaded discussions, synchronous online conferencing, and interactive presentation tools). The following paragraphs are presented in the context of Kleinfelder’s experience internally and in collaboration with the petrochemical industry.
Project-dedicated websites are an effective collaboration tool for multiple organizations to collaborate on a well-defined project with specific goals and objectives. Web services are available with ready-to-use generic formats that lend themselves well to trans-organizational collaboration. Such websites are secure, requiring a username and password, and allow for access restrictions and administrative privileges for key project team members. Additionally, the project-based website allows for the posting and archiving of project documents that can be organized according to electronic folders and subfolders. This alleviates file size restrictions on e-mail transmission of large documents, and provides the ability to maintain a single master document that can be updated without e-mailing and updating a document that results in the propagation of multiple versions. Other attributes of a generic project website include calendar, e-mail, and member contact information capabilities. Kleinfelder has successfully used project-dedicated websites for collaboration among multiple organizations involved with a single project, including the client, outside legal counsel, and other consultants. Moreover, the project website not only facilitated collaboration with the client project manager, but numerous other client internal groups (e.g., legal, public affairs, technical, and management).
The electronic discussion board is a valuable collaborative tool for both intra-organizational and trans-organizational collaboration on a particular issue or topic. The electronic discussion board allows individuals with specific tacit knowledge or expertise to share it with the adhocracy formed around the topic or issue at the convenience of that individual. Individuals may access and contribute to the discussion thread at their convenience or not at all. This alleviates the time trap of the conference call which requires concurrent participation of all members of an identified group at a specific time that must be scheduled. Also, unlike e-mail, the discussion thread is cohesive and can be archived for future use and reference. E-mail collaboration on a particular topic or issue results in a disorganized assemblage of e-mails that are hard to locate, track, and archive. The record of the discussion thread also may alleviate future issues with regard to intellectual property, clearly documenting the evolution of collaborative knowledge.
Web-based interactive tools are similar to conference calls in that multiple interested and/or contributing individuals communicate at a specified time but from remote locations via telephone. Web-based interactive tools have the added benefit of affording individuals the ability to logon to a website that is controlled by the session host who may interactively present information and operate software that is viewed by all participants. This type of tool still requires the attention of multiple individuals at a specified time, but is a considerable enhancement over the conference call by itself, allowing real-time interaction and presentation of information that would otherwise require the participants to be in the same location. Kleinfelder has successfully participated as a consultant member of a client technical network using this tool.
Kleinfelder routinely uses video conferencing for both internal collaboration and collaboration/communication with client managers at remote locations. This tool has permitted enhanced communication through enhanced social interaction over that of the conference call while considerably reducing time and cost expenses formerly incurred due to required travel.
5. Conclusions
The importance of knowledge management and innovative organizational structures within the knowledge-based modern economy is becoming increasingly important and has received greater attention in the literature recently. Most of the focus however is on intra-organizational knowledge management and collaboration. These concepts may be extended to the next evolutionary collaboration model, that of trans-organizational collaboration where technology and/or knowledge-based client and consultant organizations with similar communities of practice collaborate to develop technical solutions and best practices.
Such a collaboration model may be represented by a molecular analog: the covalent bond, a strong bond created by sharing of electrons (knowledgeable people) with the client for mutual benefit and stability. This may be accomplished using established knowledge management practices applied in a broader way. The concept of the servant leader or player coach who would typically be responsible for brokering knowledge flow within a community of practice, may be applied to that of a technical manager responsible for coordinating multiple communities of practice within and across organizations to facilitate a truly interdisciplinary outcome via architectural knowledge practices. This transfer of knowledge should occur laterally, and technical managers may monitor, promote, and facilitate such knowledge transfer, but should avoid bottle neck or linchpin situations where all knowledge must go through the technical manager.
Before trans-organizational collaboration can be effective, the potential collaborating organizations must have some mastery of internal knowledge management practices and functioning communities of practice. With these characteristics established, intra-organizational collaboration is likely to originate among communities of practice with similar interests and expertise. The ability for client and consultant organizations to collaborate and share knowledge in untraditional ways may be controlled by organizational communication styles. Client organizations that are prone to scanning the external environment for ideas and practices are likely to collaborate effectively with consulting organizations that practice an articulation style of communication. The communication process for trans-organizational collaboration may be facilitated by electronic collaboration tools, including 1) project-dedicated websites, 2) electronic discussion boards, 3) web-based interactive tools, and 4) video conferencing. Issues of intellectual property and QA/QC should be considered and accounted for when new models of trans-organizational collaboration are pursued.
6. References
Al-hawari, M., 2007, The Importance of the Four Knowledge Management Styles to Industry: Using The HSD Post Hoc Test, Journal of Knowledge Management Practice, 8.3.
Alrawi, K., 2007, Knowledge Management and the Organization’s Perception: A Review, Journal of Knowledge Management Practice, 8.1.
Bryan, L.L. and Joyce, C.I., 2007, Mobilizing Minds Creating Wealth from Talent in the 21st-Century Organization, McGraw-Hill, New York, New York, 1st Edn.
Buckman, R.H., 2004, Building a Knowledge-Driven Organization,
Grant, R.M., 1998, Organization Structures and Management Systems,
Contemporary Strategy Analysis: Concepts, Techniques, Applications, Blackwell
Publishers,
Gumus, M., 2007, The Effect of Communication on Knowledge Sharing in Organizations, Journal of Knowledge Management Practice, 8.3.
Irick, M.L., 2007, Managing Tacit Knowledge in Organizations, Journal of Knowledge Management Practice, 8.3.
Contact the Author:
Jeffrey R. Hale, P.G.; Technical Program Manager; Kleinfelder; 260 Executive Drive, Suite 500, Cranberry Township, PA 16066; Tel: (724) 772-7072; Email: jhale@kleinfelder.com
.