Reich EURAM 2010

8/8/2019 Reich EURAM 2010

1/30

Presentation at EURAMMay 2010

Dr. Blaize Horner Reich

Dr. Andrew Gemino

Dr. Chris Sauer

Exploring the Impact of

Knowledge Management on

Business Value in IT Projects

1


2/30

Research Team

2

Dr. Blaize Horner ReichRBC Professor of Technology and

InnovationSFU Business

Dr. Andrew GeminoAssociate Professor, Assoc Director,

Surrey Campus

SFU Business

Dr. Chris SauerFellow, Sad Business School,

Oxford

Research AssistantsSiew Yong Wee, PMP

Steven Toy, BBA

Supported by the Social Sciences and HumanitiesResearch Council of Canada


3/30

Agenda The Knowledge/Business Value Approach

Theoretical Model

Knowledge Management

Knowledge Alignment

Results of a Pilot Survey

3


4/30

When is Knowledge Important?

Project Complexity

Goal Uncertainty

External Uncertainty/Volatility


5/30

Project as Knowledge Process In a complex/uncertain IT project, everyone

is sharing knowledge and acquiring newknowledge:

Sponsor Project Manager Vendors/Consultants Project team members

Seen through the K lens, the job of the PM isto facilitate the knowledge practices so thatlearning happens

At the right time For the right price


6/30

Evidence of importance of KM

Executive Sponsor impact Sponsors may lack the K to lead a project

Volatility impact Loss of K as people leave the project

Expertise Coordination impact Strong positive correlation but we dont know how

We fail often at learning from projects No learning in, very little out of a project

Knowledge of the Team When K is high, PM and Sponsors do more KM


7/30

Importance of Business Value

Senior PMs told us about BV Reich & Sauer (CACM, forthcoming); Sauer & Reich

(IJPM, 2008)

Some academic work has been done Earned value,

But this doesnt get at the business value, just theattainment of targets

Research has not defined theconstruct of BV

Gemino (et al, in review) starts this discussion 7


8/30

RESEARCH MODEL

8


9/30

What is our goal?

Explore how KM may impact Business

Value Recognizing that there are multiple

influences on BV

Increase the R - the ability to explainProject Performance

9


10/30

Attaining Business Value

10

BusinessValue

ITArtifact

BusinessValue

ITArtifact

Through a KM Lens..

KnowledgeMgmt

KnowledgeAlignment


11/30

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

Using the term very very broadly.

11


12/30


Project Managers must:

Create the enablingenvironment

Acquire andmaintain the K

stocks Manage the Kpractices

12

EnablingEnvironment

KnowledgePractices

KnowledgeStocks


13/30


Enabling Environment Technological support for KM

Cultural support for learning and KM

Channels (e.g. co-location, prior collaboration)

Knowledge Stock

Existing K, Capacity to learn, K networks

Knowledge Practices Knowledge Mapping,

K sharing (formal and informal)

K Risk Mgmt (backup roles, incentives) 13


14/30

Connecting Knowledge Mgmtwith Business Value

14

Business

ValueAttained

Knowledge AlignmentKnowledge Mgmt

EnablingEnvironment

KnowledgePractices

Knowledge

Stocks


15/30

KNOWLEDGE ALIGNMENT

15


16/30

Three Types of Knowledge

16

Organizational Solution

Business Value

Desired

Project Based Knowledges

Business

Value

Attained

Technical Solution


17/30

Why Separate Knowledges?

Publications are largelyfocused on the technical

solution K

We are pushing beyondtargets to BV

The 3 knowledges are

largely developed bydifferent teams

17


18/30

Alignment of Knowledges

18

Alignment of

Project Based

Knowledges

Business Solution

Technical Solution

Business Value


Business

Value


19/30

Impact of KM on Business Value

19

Alignment ofProject BasedKnowledges

Technical Solution

Organizational Solution

Business ValueDesired


BusinessValue

Attained


Knowledge Alignment

EnablingEnvironment

KnowledgePractices

KnowledgeStocks


20/30

PILOT SURVEY RESULTS

20


21/30

The Survey Process Items to measure each model element

Items to identify project and PM types

Designed survey

5 PMs beta tested a paper copy

Made changes based on their feedback Adding BU focus

Asked Society of PMPs and ISSIG ofPMI to pilot

21


22/30

Survey demographics

N = 25

Averages with (and without) outlier Duration 19.5 mo, (15.2)

Budget $22.7M ($1.1M)

261 person months (48)

8 IT people, 11 business people on team

Majority were in-house, custom builds

22


23/30

What we could test:3 initial regressions

23

Enabling

Environment

KnowledgePractices

KnowledgeStocks

BusinessValue

Attained

1

2

3


24/30

Knowledge Stock Test

24

Construct Variable Sig.

Knowledge

Stock

IT Team Knowledge (3 items) Not Sig.

Business Team Knowledge (3 items) Not Sig.

Governance Team Knowledge

(3 items)Not Sig.

External Network (2 items) Not Sig.

Absorptive Capacity (2 items) Significant

Previous Collaboration (3 items) Not Sig.


25/30

Enabling Environment Test

25

Construct Variable Significance

Enabling

Environment

Governance Team Promotion ofLearning Environment (1 item) Not Sig.

Project Team Knowledge and

Learning Orientation (1 item) Significant

Co-Location (4 items) Not Sig.

Technology (2 items) Not Sig.


26/30

Knowledge Practices Test

26

Construct Variable Significance

Knowledge

Practices

IT Team Expertise Coordination(3 items)

Not Sig.

Business Team Expertise

Coordination (3 items) Not Sig.

Cross-Team Expertise

Coordination (5 items) Not Sig.

Formal Knowledge Practices (4

items)Not Sig.

Cross-Team Knowledge Sharing

(2 items)

Significant


27/30

Final Regression

27

EnablingEnvironment

KnowledgePractices

KnowledgeStocks

EnablingEnvironment

Business

Value

R2

= 62 % (of the variance in

Satisfaction with Business

Value is explained).


28/30

AConclusion Expertise does not matter to BV

The lifecycle matters:

Hire those willing to Learn and Share

Develop a Learning Culture Try, learn, share

Create Knowledge SharingOpportunities

Meetings, status reports, social gatherings)

28


29/30

Next Steps

Analysis and refinement of survey -

DON

E Global Survey IN PROGRESS

Cases - Fall 2010

29


30/30

Presentation at EURAMMay 2010

Thanks !

30

Supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities

Research Council of Canada

Reich EURAM 2010

Documents

Transcript of Reich EURAM 2010