Assessment and suggested conceptual approach department for international development ECA institutional strengthening project- knowledge management consultancy for ECA-Ethiopia

II'"

illI II'"

illI

I""

III I""

III -

i

...

... ,..

..

-

ECA Institutional Strengthening Project - Knowledge Management Consnltancy for ECA-Ethiopia

CNTR023767

First Report: Assessment and Snggested Conceptual Approach

Department for International Development DRAFT

CIRCULATED FOR COMMENT AND DISCUSSION

...

1

Table of Contents

Introduction . ... 6

...

.. ...

...

..

, ...

...

...

...

III

...

I

..

...

l.

...

,

...

1.1 Background . . 6

I .2 Our Approach to 'Knowledge Management' .. 7

2 The WayItIs: Knowledge Management at ECA . 8

3 The Way Forward: Improved Knowledge Sharing and Enhanced Policy Impact at

ECA... ... 18

3.1 The ECA Knowledge Initiative[EKI] . 18

3.2 Knowledge Sharing: Demand and Supply... . 19

3.2.1 Stimulating Demand.. . 20

3.2.2 Delivering Supply... .. 22

3.3 Relationship to the Institutional Strengthening Programme ...23 4 Measuring the Effect of EKI: Improvements in Knowledge Sharing and Enhanced

Policy ImpacL... .. 24

5 AppendixA: Organisational Culture and Change... .. 25 5.1 Encouraging Knowledge Sharing at ECA - an Organisational Development

Perspective.... .. 25

5.2 The Challenge - ECA as Learning Organisation ... 26

5.3 The Process - Leading the Changes.... .. 26

5.4 AnEight-Stage Process for Leading Major Change... ..30 5.5 Systems Thinking for KM to facilitate Performance ImprovemenL... .30 5.6 Self-Assessment for Functional Review... .. 3 I 5.7 Self-Assessment for KM Strategy Development and Benchmarking .31

6 Appendix B: Knowledge Flows Within ECA: .. 34

6.1 Knowledge Oriented Activities.. . .. 34

6.2 Sources of Knowledge and Information: AnOverview 51 6.3 Forums for research oriented professional interchange 65

7 Appendix C: The Systems Environment 74

7. I Information Storage... .. 74

7. 1.1 Documents and Records... . .. 74

7.1.2 Databases and Directories.. .. .. .. 77

7.2 Information Retrieval... . 79

7.3 Information Exchange... 80

7.4 Management of the Systems Environment .. 81

...

..

8 9

Interviews Carried Out During the Visit .

References ..

List of Tables and Figures

. 83

. 84

...

... ..

- ..

.. - - ..

..

..

...

- •

• -

,

..

.. -

-

- ..

-

...

Table 1: Acronyms Used in This Report... .. 5

Table 2: Stocks and Flows of Knowledge... .. 13 Table 3: Obstacles to Accessing and Sharing This Knowledge ... 14 Table 4: Leading the Process of Change: Where is ECA Situated Within Kotter's Eight

Stage Process? . 19

Table 5: Creating Opportunities and Strengthening the Incentives to Share Knowledge. 21 Table 6: Systems and Processes to Facilitate Information Flows and Knowledge Sharing

... n

Table 7: Measuring the Effect ofEKl. .. 24

Table 8: Kotter's Eight Stage Process of Change 28

Table 9: Development Management Division (DMD) - Knowledge Oriented Activities,

Requirements and Assets... .. 38

Table 10: Economic and Social Policy Division (ESPD) - Knowledge Oriented

Activities, Requirements and Assets .. 40

Table II: Regional Cooperation and Integration Division (RCID) - Knowledge Oriented

Activities, Requirements and Assets 43

Table 12: Food Security and Sustainable Development Division (FSSDD) - Knowledge

Oriented Activities, Requirements and Assets 45

Table 13: African Centre for Gender and Development (ACGD) - Knowledge Oriented

Activities, Requirements and Assets.. .. 47

Table 14: African Knowledge Networks Forum (OES) - Knowledge Oriented Activities,

Requirements and Assets... ...49

Table 15: Office of Policy Planning and Resource Management (OPRM) - Knowledge Oriented Activities, Requirements and Assets... . 50 Table 16: Ratio ofCTE to PIT for 'Internal' Knowledge Sources... 51

Table 17: Sources of Knowledge- DMD... .. .. 52

Table 18: Sources of Knowledge - ESPD. .. 54

Table 19: Sources of Knowledge - RCID.... 57

Table 20: Sources of Knowledge - FSSDD... . 60

Table 21: Sources of Knowledge - ACGD . 62

Table 22: Seminars and Workshops in 2001-2 (DMD) 65

Table 23: Seminars and Workshops in 2001-2 (ESPD)... 66

Table 24: Seminars and Workshops in 2001-2 (RCID) . 68

3

-

- -

Table 25: Seminars and Workshops in 2001-2 (FSSDD) . Table 26: Seminars and Workshops in 2001-2 (DISD) . Table 27: Those Interviewed During the Visit .

. 69

... 70 .... 83

.. -

• - - .. _-

- _..

-

- ...

.. -

-

.. -

- ..

- -

.. -

.. -

-

Figure I: ECA Business Process #1 - Policy Analysis and Dialogue... . 9 Figure 2: ECA Business Process #2 - Strategic Planning and Resource Allocation. . 11

Figure 3: EFQM Model (Common Assessment Framework) 33

4

-

£

fEconomIc and SOCIal Pohcy DlvlSlOq

Table 1: Acronyms Used in This Report

Acronym ~

---~--+Afu-~C~-

ESPD

~U

A can entre or n er an

bF

African Development Forum

r

AKNF African Knowledge Networks Forum

CGP Country Gender Profile

CT Communications Team

DMD Development Management Division

I

Division

I ECA (United Nations) Economic Commission

for Mrica

ES Executive Secretary

C

I CGD

I NEPAD New Partnership for Africa's Development

OES Office of the Executive Secretary

'OPRM Office of Policy Planning and Resource

Management

RCID Regional Cooperation and Integration

Division

f - - -

SDD Sustainable Development Division

SRDC Sub-regional Development Centre

WB World Bank

SPA Strategic Partnership vvithAfrica

tID<FPA United Nations Population Fund

I

- -

- - -

-

- -

-

...

-

...

...

..

...

.. ..

.. , ^..

...

...

• -

-

5

•

- ..

• ..

• ..

• ..

• ..

• ..

, -

.. •

..

.. ..

..

III

.. ..

•

..

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

The Project aims to support institutional strengthening at the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (ECA), by developing a strategy for knowledge management within ECA, and by preparing a detailed action plan for the implementation of this strategy.

The Project's design stage (Phases I and 2) aims to articulate a knowledge management strategy for ECA in consultation with its staff and senior management, representative users and intermediary partners, and propose a detailed action plan for implementing this strategy.

Once the strategy and action plan have been approved by the Commission's senior management, the implementation stage (Phase 3) will be launched.

The first phase ofthe project involved 'Diagnosis and Conceptualization', and addressed the following issues:

o Knowledge Management Processes: the processes used at ECA to acquire, store and transfer knowledge

o People and Culture: the basic assumptions held within ECA conceming the benefits of personal and organisational knowledge and of sharing information;

individuals' motivation and personal capacity to fulfil the requirements of a KM process

o Organisational Structure: the way in which tasks are organised, how people interact and their decision-making latitude.

o Technology: the tools to acquire, store and transfer information.

The tasks in this phase 1 comprised:

o establishing contact between the Design Team and the ECA Senior Management Team and preliminary exchange of information

o a one-week visit to Addis Ababa by the Design Team to meet the ECA Executive Secretary, Senior Management and members of each of the Divisions within the Commission.

o a preliminary assessment of the Commission's organizational culture and the attitudes towards knowledge sharing within the Commission

o planning the 'IT Systems' and 'IT Management' Audits, which will assess the key competences in these areas.

o preparation of a brief conceptual note on the management of knowledge at ECA The team made its initial visit to the Commission 1-8 November. In addition, the team leader (Yeo) made an additional visit to Addis Ababa 7-10 October. This visit, funded separately by DFID, coincided with a visit by DFID staff to discuss the proposed Institutional Strengthening Programme for ECA. Yeo participated in these discussions, which provided an opportunity to integrate the work under this project with the broader progranune ofchange at the Commission. We will indicate in this, and subsequent reports, how our activities will mesh with the wider Institutional Strengthening Programme

6

.. •

..

.. •

..

.. •

.. ..

..

.. - - -

.. - ..

- -

..

..

..

..

..

..

This report outlines the findings of these two visits.

1.2 Our Approach to 'Knowledge Management'

We define knowledge management as the development of tools, processes, systems, structures and cultures explicitly to improve the creation, sharing and use of knowledge, critical for decision-making. These decisions can be 'internal' to ECA, and could include, for exannple, operational issues, administration and support processes. Some ofthe measures we propose will certainly contribute to these sorts of intemal decisions. We do not, however, confine our attention to intemal decisions: A knowledge management initiative must also contribute to ECA's 'bottom line' - which is to improve the quality of policy dialogue and debate concerning African development, and to contribute to more effective policy-making within Africa Measuring ECA's impact on policy is far from straightforward, and linking improvements in knowledge management to this impact is harder still. But we think it important that our proposals do address this issue, and demonstrate how improved knowledge management will help make ECA a more effective organization. We devote some attention to this issue below.

The creation of an effective knowledge-sharing organisation involves significant cultural and information system challenges. Successful implementation requires a step change in levels of resource and organisational priority. We aim to formulate a strategy for the development of knowledge management (KM) at ECA which will allow the Commission to leverage one of its most important assets - its intellectual capital- to promote development in AfrIca.Itis important to note, however, that knowledge concerning development in AfrIca resides not only within the Commission, but throughout the continent (and the world). So aKM strategy, to be useful. must take advantage not only of the 'inside expertise' within the Commission, but tap into the 'outside wisdom' of the broader development Community.

We can identify four key facets of KM relevant to the Commission:

• Capturing the experienceI knowledgeIinformation residing within 'the system'

• Managing the flow of knowledge and information, within ECA and between ECA and the rest of the world

• Creatmg a learning culture, whereby ECA staff learn from each other and eq ually important, learn from the outside world

• Moving the Commission to a position of 'knowledge leadership' in African development

During our initial visit we approached the development of a KM strategy from three perspectives:

• The systems environment: We based our approach here on the audit procedures outlined in our original proposal.

• Organisational culture and change: We based our approach here on the European Foundation for Quality Management's (EFQM) Excellence Model. EFQM is used widely in programmes of change management and in situation analysis or

functional reviews, where it typically identifies 150+ areas for improvement.

• Identification and analysis of some of the most important 'knowledge flows' and 'knowledge assets' within ECA: we based our approach here on the work done

7

..

.. ...

... ..

...

...

.. ...

..

... .

.. ...

.. ..

..

...

...

• ..

..

by Makosky, who models business processes in terms of inputs, which are transformed by organizational processes into outputs for clients or partners (both internal and external).I During the time available to us we could not carry out a comprehensive inventory of knowledge flows within ECA. Instead, we focused our attention here on two business processes which we judged to be key to ECA- 'policy analysis and dialogue' and 'strategic planning'. For each division tried to identitY one or two key activities involving policy analysis and dialogue.

Examining one or two activities inthis way was essential, but in order to ensure that we achieved a balanced picture of knowledge flows, we supplemented the detailed analysis by carrying out a 'broad brush' overview of each division's sources of knowledge.

2 THE WAY IT IS: KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT ATECA

We examined the flows of knowledge within ECA from a number of perspectives. Two approaches proved particularly useful:

• An analysis of a key activity in each division using the Makosky model, which examines core business processes in terms of knowledge oriented activities (KOAs), knowledge requirements (KRs) and knowledge assets (KAs).

• An overview of the key sources of knowledge and information used by each Division, taking into account the full range of its activities and not merely the key activity analysed using the Makosky approach.

Makosky considers processes such as core business lines, R&D, strategy and policy development, and support services. These processes involve knowledge oriented activities (KOAs), knowledge requirements (KRs) and knowledge assets (KAs). During the time available to us we focused our attention on two business processes which we judged to be key to ECA - 'policy analysis and dialogue' and 'strategic planning'. These processes are illustrated in Figure 1 and Figure 2 below. During the initial visit, we focused on the knowledge oriented activities related to Policy Analysis and Dialogue process, since this is most clearly related to the project's focus on ECA's external links with the African development community and ECA's impact on policy So for each division tried to identitY a key activity involving 'policy analysis and dialogue' .

ILyle Makosky, 'Mapping Knowledge Assets' inPatrick Hunt, ed.,Knowledge Management: Implications and Applications for Development Organizations,Report of a workshop organized by the Bellanet International Secretariat, Washington DC February 2-4, 2000 [www.bellanet.org]

8

.. ...

... ..

- _•

- •

.. ...

- ... _...

- -

- _...

- -

- .. _..

.. ...

...

• ...

.. ...

• ...

• - _• - •

-

I ' ^{II • II •}

^{II •}

^J r

r J

r

I I

I

I I

Performance indit1lltors (impact a8Setlmen1)

M~ml>l'r~t"te·s.

U~lIdllforftOlldy

de~blonl

Impact / OnlJortunities Activities

Dissemination

l==:ii...J==:Iliillt== ^1.

':':.:::b~:::::'

Analysis

NEPAD

Strategy and targeting

Member State Needs

Opportuuities for ECA interventions

10

I •• • ^•

^Ifl

^1--'

^J

¹¹

Figure 2: ECA Businen Pro(ess #2 - Strategic Planning and Resource Allocation

Performance indicatoni (impact assessment)

Member state's calendar of olicy decisions

I

TItIpact I Opportunities

Ad"'ocacy

iii:::lllr-ir-I~ ~ ^I ::~:!~::~~~, ^I

Activities

Dissemination

Opportunities for ECA interventions Analysis

....•..;.:.,,':';: ,.,.::;:- ""';"':';'::;':1

Strategy and targeting

11

...

...

• -

• -

• - _..

...

...

...

...

-

- -

.. - -

III

..

..

... ..

.. ..

.. -

We classified knowledge assets according to the number of characteristics, which are described in more detail in section 6.1. We found it useful to focus on three aspects of the knowledge assets and flows within ECA:

• The source of the knowledge - whether internal or external to ECA. This can be seen in the "Source" column in the tables below.

• How the knowledge is accessed - whether it was codified, tangible and explicit knowledge (CTE) or Person-to-person, intangible and tacit (PTE).

This can be seen in the "Accessed how?" column in the tables below.

• The role played by networks ofpolicy-makers and researchers outside ECA as sources of knowledge. This can be seen in the "Source" column, where 7 identifies an informal network of policy-makers and 9 a network in the research community.

The results of both the detailed analysis of a business process for each division, and the broad overview of each division's knowledge sources confirm a common finding in studies of knowledge management: the prevalence of "knowledge silos". In an organization characterized by knowledge silos information flows more freely between a given unit or division and its contacts outside the organization, than it does between units or divisions within the organization. As a result, there is relatively little sharing or exchange of knowledge within the organization. The tables presented in sections 6. I and 6.2 show very few entries of'2' (knowledge from another division). Knowledge silos are particularly common when units within an organization have stronger links outside the organization than within it, and the survey data for the African Centre for Gender and Development, and for the Africa Knowledge Networks Forum offer a good example of this phenomenon. These are two of the divisions which have most successfully built networks outside ECA among policy makers and practitioners, and the date for these divisions confirm the impression that knowledge provided by external networks play an important role in their work. Yet for both ACGD and AKNF, the tables suggest that flows of knowledge to and from other divisions do not play an important role in the work of the two divisions. There thus seems to be an inverse correlation between success in external networking and in knowledge sharing with other divisions. Of course both are important: the trick is to combine both internal and external knowledge sharing.

The role played by external networks is also of some importance, given our project's emphasis on developing communities of practice and enhancing policy impact. Here the survey confirms anecdotal evidence and our own impressions: that these networks playa particularly important role in two of the divisions - ACGD and AKNF, a more modest role in DMD and ESPD, and a less important role in RCID and FSSD. This does not seem to be an artefact of the particular activities we have chosen to analyse in detail in these tables, since the overviews in section 6.2 convey the same message.

This analysis focused on the flows of knowledge involved in a key knowledge oriented activity in each division. This one activity might, of course be atypical in its knowledge requirements, so we asked each division to provide an overview of the sources of knowledge it used across the whole range of its activities. While it is harder to assess the relative importance of each knowledge source across a range of different activities, this helped ensure that we arrived at a balanced picture of knowledge flows within the divisions.

One interesting fmding emerges from this broad brush survey: internal information flows (i.e. within ECA) are dominated by codified / tangible and explicit knowledge (CTE),

12

-

.. [

- -

-

_..

f'

ill

-

-

-

""

- _•

-

- •

..

and Person to Person / Intangible / Tacit (PIT) knowledge seems to playa much smaller role. This suggests that the divisions use each other as sources of statistical data or textual information rather than as sources of professional expertise or other forms of intangible information. This is consistent with the anecdotal evidence we collected during our visit and again confirms the existence of knowledge silos within ECA.

The survey data discussed above, as well as our assessment of the systems environment at ECA, suggested that we could usefully consider knowledge flows and knowledge management using a four-way classification based on

• the distinction between knowledge which is codified / tangible and explicit (CTE), and knowledge which is person to person / intangible and tacit (PIT)

• the distinction between internal and external sources of information

Of course it is possible to exaggerate these distinctions. Some knowledge flows combine both codified and person to person knowledge - the most obvious example is a table of data, which requires interpretation and qualification by an expert. And there is a danger that a placing too much emphasis on the distinction between internal and external sources of information might prove misleading in a project designed to reduce the importance of the institutional boundary between ECA and its partners in the development community.

Nevertheless, this classification scheme provides a useful organizing principle for both our diagnosis and prescription. We consider first in Table 2 the kinds of information important to ECA which fall into each of these categories

Table 2: Stocks and Flows of Knowledge

Internal External

(Within ECA) (outside ECA)

Records Published ECA documents and

Administrative Fanus reports

Contact infonnation (held in Statistical and other data documents or in databases) Research in progress at ather Documents for internal pllJl)oses institutions

CodifiedITangibleIExplicit Work in progress on reports Policy decisions, initiatives in destined for public distribution member states

Content of email messages and Data on impact and attachments effectiveness of policies in

member states Audio and video material

Holdings of the Library

What is ECA's expertise? Wbat Expertise (individual or issues has ECA worked on in institutional) on various issues the past? What issues does it in member states and elsewhere have experti se at present?

Identity ofkey stakeholders in Policy issues which Divisions member states

Person-to-personIIntangibleI would like to tackle

Policy issues on the horizon in Tacit

Expertise of ECA staff members member states (especially if not directly related

Current status of policy debates to responsibilities of current

post) in member states

Examples of best practice

- . - ^I (policies which work and those

13

• -

"'"

•

I---~--

which don't) in membersta1es Donor interests and priorities Personal networks of key

decision-makers and I

practitioners on an issue in member states

- - _...

- - - ...

-

... -

- -

- ... _..

-

...

...

... ..

... ..

...

Table 3 summarizes the discussion in section 7 on the systems and procedures which act as obstacle to wider sharing of these forms ofknowledge and information. The obstacles are many and various. but it is possible to characterize them as follows:

Table 3: Obstacles toAccessjn~ and Sharing This Knowledge

F-=-

^-

No records or document No comprehensive database or

! management system or repository of published ECA

procedures in place, for documents and reports managing either paper based or

No clear responsibility or electronic records

policies for acquiring and Administrative F^OIDlSare managing e).,1ernal statistics and generally processed as paper, other data

not electronically

No systemic procedures for Contact infonnation is typically tracking researchinprogress at held in documents or in other institutions

databases accessible only to

No systemic procedures for individuals and is not managed

on an enterprise wide basis. The tracking policy decisions and foundation is thus lacking for a ' initiatives or the impact of client relationship management polices in member states system and a directory of Infonnation on expertise outside external expertise. ECA is created and maintained Documents for internal purposes by some ECA staff, but is not aretypicallyheld on individual available on an enterprise wide CodifiedITangibleIExplicit

Pes, not on accessible network basis.

drives

I

Correspondence tracking system exists, but does not allow transfer of documents across divisional boundaries Wark in progress on reports destined for publication (and I

infonnation on the current status of the work) is not easily accessible by ECA staff and management

No full text indexing and retrieval system available for internal documents or for work

I

in progress on reports I

I

No taxonomy classification system exists for ECA activities vlhich can be used to classify

14

I

-_. --I

for expertIse dlrectones. I

Metadata (such as keywords, place in ECA taxonomy, even

I the.document's~uthor)is

typIcally not avadable for ECA documents, which makes browsing and retrieval difficult Email messages and attachments are managed through Lotus Notes, but ernails are not retained for any length of time Notes is used as an email client and server, but little use is made of its other facilities, such as calendaring or the creation of discussion databases

...

III

...

...

III

... ...

... ...

... ..

-

...

... ..

-

...

Mismatch~orthe perception of a mismatch) between the

information needs of the divisions and the services available from the Library No directory ofECA institutional expertise No expertise locator forECA staff members

Few opportunities for professional exchanges across divisions withinECAsuch as regular seminars

Fe\v opportlll1ities for collaborative projects which cross divisional boundaries

No enterprise wide contact database or system for storing infonnation on ECA's clients^Of its interactions with them. Asa result, no easy means of recording identity and concerns of key stakeholders in member states^Ofinteractions with them.

Similarly, no means of tracking networks of decision-makers and practitioners or ECA interactions with them.

15

No systematic procedures^fOf

I

tracking current status of policy debates or policy issues 'on the horizon' in member states Little or no use of Instant

Messenger software for infonnal infonnation sharing by staff members

Person-lo-personIIntangible

ITacit Few attempts to identify and

catalogue examples of best practice on particular policy issues(PRSPLearning Group is

I

Interaction with networks of policy makers and practitioners is mainly carried out by email and (to a lesser extent) by post and telephone. Even email distribution lists are not

!exploited effectively (the

I Communications Team is an exception), because there is no generally available (enterprise wide) database in which to store email addresses

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _~ __L_ J

lIIl

•

III

...

•

-

- ...

...

...

...

...

...

,

• ...

.. ...

..

...

.. ...

I

..

...

- ..

- ..

-

.. -

.. ...

.. ...

.. ...

.. ...

...

• ...

I , - - - -

--I

I Inot used widely evenwithin

I

I

ECA, and not at all externally,

I

sonoc_onvem_.entwa_YOf_

. building virtual, online conununities around particular

ISSueS

• Obstacles to sharing knowledge which is internal and codified (CTE) have arisen because ECA has made significant investments in computing and communications hardware. These investments have allowed ECA staff to produce a growing number of documents and emails, but ECA has not put in place satisfactory systems for managing the growing volume of unstructured information which the institution produces (in the form of documents, records or email messages). Removing these obstacles is mainly a question of introducing the right procedures, systems and software.

• Obstacles to sharing knowledge which is internal and person to person (PIT) have origins in both systems and organizational culture. ECA lacks directories of both its 'institutional expertise' and the expertise of its indhidual staff members. As a result, there is no easy means of identifYing non-obvious sources of expertise among other ECA staff members. In addition, many staff members would find it difficult to determine whether ECA had worked in the past on an issue, and if so, how to identifY the relevant outputs and staff members involved in the activity. These system issues can be overcome in a fairly straightforward way, but organization practices and culture also playa role in the creation of these knowledge silos. There is no tradition of professionally oriented forums in which ideas can be exchanged freely informally by a wide range of staff, whether these be regular staff seminars or informal 'brown bag' lunches. Nor are there a large number of opportunities for collaborative policy analysis which cross divisional boundaries (though initiatives are now underway to encourage such work). Removing these obstacles involves changes to systems and to organizational culture and practice.

• Obstacles to sharing knowledge which is external and codified (CTE) have their origins both in ECA systems, and in the incentives which face its senior professional staff. Here to the solution to the systems issues is relatively straightforward: one needs in particular a directory of experts which helps identifY expertise located outside ECA. The Mrican Knowledge Networks Forum has initiated such a database, but it needs to be extended enterprise wide, with inputs from subj ect matter specialists among the staff. Here, though, incentives and organizational practice seem the main obstacle to more effective use of information. A few groups, such as the African Centre for Gender and Development, and the African Knowledge Networks Forum, have a clear understanding of the need to track the policy process in member states in order to ensure their activities have an impact on policy. They do this rather effectively, even though they are not equipped with any sophisticated tools designed to for manage such information. So the lack of tools does not seem to be the real obstacle to gathering and managing this information. Instead, the other divisions do not seem to have as keen a sense of the importance of

16

.. •

.. •

..

III

..

11II

..

-

_..

..

..

..

- -

..

,..

.. ..

..

..

III

..

III

..

..

tracking this infonnation, or of building the networks of policy makers and practitioners which will provide them with such knowledge. Since achieving impact on policy has not, until recently been a high priority for programme managers at ECA, it is not surprising that they lack the incentive to gather the infonnation necessary to achieve enhanced policy impact. Removing obstacles ofthis kind req uires a change in perceptions, so that ECA's effectiveness as an institution comes to be judged by its impact on policy, and staff come to see their mission as enhancing this effectiveness. Staff who lack experience in creating and managing networks, must be supported by training and mentoring

• Obstacles to sharing knowledge which is external and person to person (PIT) are in some ways the most difficult of all to tackle. Tracking key stakeholders, or building networks of policy-makers and practitioners is clearly made more difficult by the absence an enterprise ",'ide contact database. Again the record of the ACGD and the AKNF suggest that networks can still be built, even in the absence of convenient systems and tools. So the systems are an obstacle, but probably not a decisive one. Here too, attitudes, culture and incentives seem to be the most important factor. The need for ECA to have impact on policies and to be effective is now generally recognized by many staff, but only a few understand the importance of building and maintaining strong external networks in order to ensure that ECA activities have an impact on policy. And even where this importance is recognized, staff members may lack experience in building such networks. It is difficult to sustain close working relationships with policy-makers and practitioners without the benefit of regular interactions through meetings etc. These interactions are typically carried out by email, post and sometimes by telephone. Improved software and systems can be some help in this area. Email distribution lists offer many advantages in situations of poor connectivity, but they are not exploited effectively because there is no enterprise wide database in which to store email addresses. If properly designed, such a database would make it easy to store addresses and maintain distribution lists. Email lists have many advantages, but lack the interactivity which is often helpful in sustaining networks and communities of practice. Although Notes itself offers a discussion database facility, this is neither powerful nor easy to use. We therefore think investing in a system such as QuickPlace, which is easier to use and manage, would make this challenging task somewhat easier.

17

- ..

- ..

- ..

- ..

- ..

-

- -

-

-

- -

.. -

- ..

.. -

.. - .. ..

.. -

-

3 THE WAY FORWARD: IMPROVED

KNOWLEDGESHA~NGANDENHANCED

POLICY IMPACT AT ECA

3.1 The ECA Knowledge Initiative [EKl}

The project was originally designated as a "knowledge management" initiative, but it has a goal which goes beyond the introduction of systems for "knowledge management".

Knowledge acquisition and sharing, and the systems and attitudes which support it are a key feature, but the ultimate goal is to enbance ECA's impact on policy. Knowledge sharing is a means towards this end.

We therefore propose a set of interrelated activities which we term the ECA Knowledge Initiative [EKl]. What are the key objectives ofEKl?

• Determine key points in the integrated core business process where knowledge needs to be injected - what do staff need to know or learn at each stage, from their colleagues within ECA and from the wider development community outside

• IdentitY the sources of knowledge available in various forms to staff and create an framework of information architecture that will make this allof this knowledge easily searchable on line

• Collect knowledge related practices which are proving most effective in doing the core business

• Make these best practices easily accessible

• IdentitY and address the disincentives and organizational barriers to knowledge sharing, within ECA and with outside partners

What are the key outputs ofEKl'l

• Launch a process of cultural change within ECA designed to change attitudes to and knowledge acquisition and knowledge sharing within the organization

• Strengthen the process of knowledge exchange with partners outside ECA-·

create new communities of practice, strengthen existing communities of practice

• Ensure that existing collaborative tools which contribute to these goals are used more effectively, and supplement these tools with new systems which and facilitate knowledge acquisition and knowledge retrieval and leverage the current investment in the ECA intranet and web tools

Are the conditions right to launch a major programme of change at ECA? Kotter has identified eight reasons for the failure of major corporate change programmes. He then highlights how addressing them in sequence can afford the best chance of making change efforts sustainable, and the best chance of their resulting in a new paradigm or way of

18

- ..

.. -

- -

.. - _..

- ..

... ..

- -

- ..

.. -

...

... ..

...

.. ...

.. ...

... ..

.. ...

-

doing business. He does not underestimate the scale of the challenge or its difficulty, but he is at pains to point out that the fundamental groundwork has to be done first.

Kotter's first three key stages are already in place. The fourth has been started and these should indeed lay the foundation for further progress. Table 4 gives more details. We have seen many cases of development projects where this was not the case and where we had serious doubts concerning the sustainability of outcomes oftechnical assistance as a result. At this stage that we are optimistic that the ECA Knowledge Initiative can be successfully led and managed.

Table 4: Leading the Proce.. of Change: WhereisECA Situated Within Kotter', Eight Stage Process?

! Stage Where is ECA Situated?

i I Edablishing a sense of Already achieved and enhanced by the Open Space2002

, urgency

2 Creating the guiding Already in place. Senior managers are behind the ISP.

I coalition Important new members of the coalition will be the new Director OPe, the new Head of the ISP Management Unit, and the new Chief ofHR Services.

3 Developing the vision and The vision is clear and agreed. The strategy will be articulated

I strategy in Barmock Consulting's ISP 'blueprint' design paper (due January 2003)

4 Communkating the change This has been initially but significantly addressed through the I

"ision auspices of the Open Space 2002 conference. The ES announced the forthcoming ISP with its 3 pillars of Planning

&Budgeting, HR Systems improvement, and Knowledge Management Strategy. The conununication process must continue and there should be an official 'latmch' for the ISP early in 2003

5 Empowering broad-based This has just started. The Progranune Plan and strategy for the action ISP v..·ill articulate the programme of action to be implemented over the period January 2003 - July 2004. The establishment of a committee ofthe convenors of sessions at the Open Space has empowered 5taffto synthesis the outputs of this event into a report and agree priorities for the programme of action that they endorsed so finnly in principle at the Open Space.

6 Generating quick wins This ad hoc conunittee has been tasked with choosing (or reconunending) a range of not more than 12 Quick Wins for the Initial Implementation Phase of the iSP.

7 Consolidating gains and To be assessed mid 2003 producing more change

8 Anchoring new approaches Shouldbeachieved by the end of 2005 in the culture

3.2 Knowledge Sharing: Demand and Supply

Itis useful tothinkof knowledge sharing in terms ofdemand and supply. By demand we mean the desire and willingness on the part of ECA staff to share and exchange information. Supply corresponds to the existence of working practices which encourage

19

- ..

- ..

- ..

- ..

- _...

- ..

- -

... - - ...

.. ....

.. - _...

- _...

.. -

.. - .. -

- ...

-

the sharing of knowledge and the availability of hardware and software which facilitate knowledge sharing. Both demand and supply are important, and we intend to address both during the implementation phase.Itis also important to keep in mind that we aim to foster knowledge sharing along two dimensions: mternally, among ECA staff, and externally, with the rest of the Mrican development community.

Itis worth remembering that the Terms ofReference call for a six-month implementation phase, so It is important to set realistic targets for what can be achieved in such a short time period. On the other hand, the EKI is one of the three pillars of the Institutional Strengthening Programme, which has a much broader scope and is scheduled to run over three years. From the point of view of this project, the EKI must invol ve a set of well defmed activities which will yield measurable outcomes within six months. In addition, our approach to institutional change highlights the importance of 'quick wins' as one of the key stages in securing acceptance and support for organizational change. From a broader perspective, however we should treat the implementation phase of the DFID project as the launching pad for a much more ambitious series of activities to take place as part of the ISP. In designing the implementation phase of this contract we therefore need to balance the short term need for quick wins and the need to lay asolid foundation for the longer term process of change.

3.2.1 Stimulating Demand

Launch new activities based on cross divisional task teams o launch more 'rapid response' activities

o execute these activities using teams operating outside the existing divisional structure

o new activities should have high visibility and impact o must be carried out quickly

o require a broader range of expertise than can be found in anyone diviSIOn o entrust these projects to a "task team" drawn from more than one division o disband the task team at the end of the project

o support the work of these task tearns through the collaboration software (QuickPlace) which we will introduce during the implementation phase.

This is a particular example of a more general approach, namely a move to a matrix style organization, which we think ECA will inevitably move towards as the Institutional Strengthening Programme progresses.

Impl'oved communication within the Divisions o knowledge sharing begins at home

o create pressures to improve communication within Divisions in order to begin creating an institutional culture in which knowledge is shared

o carry out divisional self assessments which go beyond the April 2002 exercise o training in leadership, team building and communications skills

o through workshops, individual coaching, and mentoring 20

• - -

- •

- •

• -

- - _...

-

- ...

- •

- ... -

.. -

• - - •

• -

• -

• -

• -

o make effective leadership, team building and communication a key element in the performance contracts of senior managers

Senior managers must accept that sharing knowledge and communicating more effectively with the staff they manage are a key responsibility, on which their performance will be judged. At the same time as this is implemented, we must ensure that senior managers receive the training and other support necessary to carry out this new responsibility, since not all of them have the attitudes and aptitude required to perform effectively.

Create more 'structured' opportunities for knowledge sharing within ECA o regular professional / research seminars, held at least every fortnight o attended by ES and other senior managers, who must lead by example o encourage informal workshops and seminars (brown bag lunches) within and

across divisions, again ensure endorsement by leadership, surprise appearances by ES and other senior managers

Strengthen the incentives to communicate and share knowledge outside ECA o make the creation of effective external networks and communities of practice

an explicit element in the performance contracts of senior managers, whose importance will increase each year

o ensure that this is included as a key element in assessing Di visional performance and that it forms part of the self assessment exercise

o 'spotlight' those divisions who are already doing this effectively by featuring these activities in internal communications, the intranet and in presentations to senior management

For convenience, Table 5 groups these .demand side' initiatives within the same classification framework used in section 2 above.

Table 5: Creatin2 Opportunities and Strengthening the Incentives to Share Knowledge

! Internal External

(within ECA) (outside ECA)

There is already a reasonable flow of codified information

I CodifiedITangibleI Explicit internally. This requires more effective supporting systems, not a change in incentives c-

Launch new activities based on Make the creation of effective cross divisional task teams. external networks and

I conununities of practice an

! Create more 'structured'

, explicit element in the

opportunities for knowledge

sharing within ECA, including perfonnance contracts of senior managers, whose importance Person-to-personIIntangibleI research seminars, held at least

will increase each year Tacit every fortnight and attended by

the ES and other senior Ensure that this is included as a

managers key element in assessing

Encouragelesssrruchrred divisional perfonnance as well workshops and seminars (brown and that it fonns part of the bag llmches) within and across divisional self assessment divisions, with endorsementby ^exercises

21

'Spotlight' those divisions who are already doing this

effectivelybyfeaturing these activities in internal

communications, the intranet andinpresentations to senior management

- ..

.. ..

.. ..

..

..

- ..

.. -

II

..

..

.. ..

..

I I

..

ill

...

II

...

II

-

~ leadership

I Improve communication within

II

the Divisions - create pressures to improve communication within Divisions in order to

1 begin creating an institutional

~I

shared

Make effective leadership, team

L

key element in the perfonnance

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _---l_c_o__ntr_a_"_'t_s_o_f_se_Ill_'

o_r_m_ana_g~er_s

3.2.2 Delivering Supply

Create a systems environment which is aligned with the current needs of the core business processes

o Product tracking system

o Enterprise wide experts database o Enterprise wide contacts database

o Communities of practice software (QuickPlace) o Shared drives and classificationInavigation systems

o Introducing basic records management standards and processes

Ensuring that the systems environment continues to serve the needs ofthe business processes as these needs evolve in the future

o New delivery and quality assurance mechanisms

o Service delivery agreements for the knowledge hubs o 'Missionaries' inthe divisions

Ensuring IT and KM perspectives have a voice at the senior management level o Appoint a new Chief Knowledge Officer

o Basedinthe ISP office

Again, for convenience, Table 6 regroups these initiatives within the same framework used in section 2.

Table 6: Systems and Processes to Facilitate Information Flows and KnOWledge Sharing

!

I Internal External

I C.,." " ..."" ^,.",rn

(within ECA) (outside ECA)

Establish enterprise wide Develop enterprise wide contacts database, consolidate contacts database to facilitate existing contacts information the management of email into this databa5e distribution lists for

Establish formal procedures for conununicating with networks records and document and communities outside ECA

22

-

Launch pilot projects involving the creation of new 'knowledge networks' inECApriority areas illtroduce software (such as Lotus QuickPlace) to facilitate interactions \vith policy makers and practitioners outsideECA Develop enterprise wide contacts database to function as external expertise locator.by adding individuals' areas of expertise to their records within the database

Establish directory or expertise forECAstaff members, using ECA taxonomy

Extend the Communications Product Tracking System to serve as a means of managing and tracking the process of commissioning,\\Tiling,peer reviewing, translating and publishing ECA reports Introduce and encourage the use of instant messenger software (such as Lotus SarneTime) for infonnal infonnation sharingby ECA staff

---~--__c_-_,___----

management, appoint records manager

Measures to facilitate access to shareable documents on network drives, such as full text indexing and provision of taxonomy for classifying documents

Introduce procedures for proper archiving and storage and retrieval of email messages and attachments

Create taxonomy for ECA activities

Introduce electronic records and document management system, with eventual transition to a full content repository

Person-to-personIIntangible ITacit

l~----­

I

-

...

...

-

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

..

.. ..

...

...

3.3 Relationship to the Institutional Strengthening Programme

.. ...

.. -

.. ...

... ..

-

The Knowledge Initiative also forms an important component ofthe broader Institutional Strengthening Programme (ISP) for ECA, which will be launched in 2003:

The ISP will address the entire range ofissues, from budgeting and resource alJocation to human resource management. The Knowledge Initiative will not address these issues directly, but much of what we do will be closely linked to resource allocation and human resource management, and we will have to inform ourselves of developments in these areas.

Broadly speaking, EKI aims to introduce the tools and help change the attitudes which will be necessary to enhance ECA's impact on policy, by transforming the nature of the work which ECA does and the business processes which it employs.

One major thrust of the ISP will be to strengthen the role of learning within ECA. EKI will contribute to this learning process in two ways:

..

...

I

I

lilt ..

• ..

I

III ..

.. ..

III ..

III ..

III ..

•

.. ....

.... ..

-

• By identifYing innovative practices within ECA which have a significant policy impact, and to help others in ECA to learn "how it's done" and to spread learning and best practice within ECA

• To strengthen ECA's links with outside partners, as part of its role of identifYing best practice within the development community in Africa

.. -

.. ....

4 MEASURING THE EFFECT OF EKI:

IMPROVEMENTS IN KNOWLEDGE SHARING AND ENHANCED POLICY IMPACT

lit

....

.... ..

Internal (within ECA)

External (outside ECA)

.. ....

.. ....

.... ..

....

Measure level and growth of contacts added to the enterprise v.·ide contacts database Track level and pattern of database usage

Establish formal procedures for records and docmnent

management, appoint records manager

Track number of documents on shared drives, frequency of access to these documents across divisions

Track use of enterprise wide contacts database to manage email distribution lists for communicating with external networks

Track ntunber of individual areas of expertise added to contacts database

Track usage of contacts database as external expertise locator

....

loll

.. ,..

...

iIIr

CodifiedITangibleIExplicit Track usage of fulllext indexes andtaxonomy for documents Track documents disposed of and archived

Measure number of retrievals of archived email messages and attachments

Creale taxonomy for ECA activities

24

Track use of Lotus QuickPlace Measure percentage of ECA

publicalions managed using the Person-ta-personIIntangible

ITacit

Measure percentage of ECA docwnents migrated to

electronic records and docwnell

k

management system, and in due

I course to the content repository

f - ,--------- - + - - - 1 Track usage of directory of Evaluate results of pilot projects expertise for ECA staff involving the creation of new

members 'knowledge networks' inECA

priorityareas iIIr

,..

....

III

III

-

,..

..

-

" = ^II

II Ii

2

" ^•

I I 2

-

25

5 APPENDIX A: ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE AND CHANGE

5.1 Encouraging Knowledge Sharing at ^{ECA -} an

Organisational Development Perspective

Introduce «Outcome Mapping Techniques" in order to encourage clearer identification of ECA' s external partners (actual and potential), and the impact ECA expects its actions to have on the behaviour of these partners

(say) in facilitating interactions with policy makers and practitioners outside ECA

Introduce "Outcome Mapping Teclmiques" in order to encourage clearer identification of each division's ECA's intcmal partners (i.e. other divisions and support setvices), and the impact the division expects its actions to have on the

behaviour of these partners ~ ^---.J

extended Communications Product Tracking System Track number of hits on tracking systemsbymembers of staff (other than authors)

Track use of Lotus SameTime for informal information sharing byECA staff

The fashionable subject of 'Knowledge Management' (KM), as it has been developed recently in Western Countries tends to harbour two false assumptions. The first is that it often assumes that knowledge is explicit and that all knowledge worth having can be documented and then re-applied based on the documentation. The second is that, given the advances in the field of infonnation and communications technology (lCT), the most important (if not all) solutions for better knowledge management will involve the

purchase and deployment of ever more sophisticated hardware and software. The former tends to lead to the accumulation of vast amounts of bureaucracy which achieves little.

The latter often tends to persuade people to duplicate some elements of this (often arbitrarily chosen) in electronic fonnat, but frequently fails to persuade them to abandon familiar old paper-based systems, even when this would be possible or desirable. Perhaps the worst of all flawed perceptions is that engineers can design people out of systems rather than into them, based on the assumption that it is possible to create and maintain systems that will be free of human foibles and errors. ltis a corollary of the

misconception that organisations are essentially mechanical, whereas they are, of course, essentially organic.

InJapan and most other Asian countries people have always recognised that much of the most useful knowledge is tacit. Itis abouthow people do things more than what they do.

ltis much harder to document and cannot be replicated remotely by simply reading a manual. Consequently many KM initiatives have tended to tl)' to hit the wrong target in the wrong way. Because there is excess focus on explicit knowledge there is excessive

.. ••

•• r

..

...

I

II.

...

lo.

...

••

••

u

..

•• .-

. •• ^-

I .

••

I .

.. ,.

, ..

I .

,-

W

,-

I .

,-

iii

.. ,-

,-

III

,-

III

••