Knowledg e Mana gement as K ey Factor in [617834]

Fatma Torun
Knowledg e Mana gement as K ey Factor in
Project P erformance
Master's ThesisEconomy

MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT

MANAGEMENT REPORT

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AS A KEY FACTOR
IN PROJECT PERFORMANCE

A STUDY OF A HIGH-SPEED TRAIN PROJECT AT XXX

FATMA TORUN UNIVERSITY OF EAST LONDON
SEPTEMBER 2004 EAST LONDON BUSINESS SCHOOL

iABSTRACT

Most organisations are aware that in t oday’s highly competitive environment managing
effectively their knowledge is the only wa y to achieve a sustainable competitive
advantage. One of the primary areas to wh ich knowledge management can be applied is
the field of project management. An increas ing number of business sectors are adopting a
project approach to carry out a range of essentia l activities where valuable knowledge is
gained. Knowledge from projects is an importa nt resource for furt her projects, because
projects solve innovative and interdisciplin ary tasks. However, the majority of
organisations do not manage the information gained through past pr ojects. Failure to
transfer knowledge from past to future proj ects leads to wasted activity and unnecessary
expenses by ‘reinventing the wheel’. Therefore, knowledge management is a critical
success factor for many projects. The purpose of this Management Report is to approach knowledge management from the
perspective of project management. The ma in objective is to define how knowledge
management can be enhanced within a proj ect by analysing suitable tools and relevant
theories. The research is based on the high-s peed train project XY of the company XXX.
This project is an important milestone for XXX to improve its market position in Spain. The knowledge gained through the XY project w ill be the key factor for the success of
the further high-speed train projects. The main finding of the case st udy highlights that there is a lack of formal knowledge
management activities at the project. Th e project team focuses mainly on personal
interaction for transferring knowledge and info rmation technology is not used to its full
potential. A hybrid approach to knowledge management for project environments is
suggested, taking into account technical as well as human-specific aspects. The main
recommendation is to determine a knowledge management strategy, which preferably
focuses on transferring tacit knowledge and gives information technology a support
function. Other areas of improvement are cr eating an open and constructive project
culture, including knowledge ini tiatives in reward system s and fostering documented
project review sessions. Fina lly, general conclusions are pr ovided to answer the main
research question of this management report.

iiTABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF APPENDICES………………………………………………………………………………… iv
TABLE OF FIGURES………………………………………………………………………………………… v
ABBREVIATIONS……………………………………………………………………………………………. vi
I. INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………………………………………… 1
1.1 Background……………………………………………………………………………………………. 1
1.2 Definition of the Problem ………………………………………………………………………… 2
1.3 Objectives and Research Questions…………………………………………………………… 3
1.4 Scope and Limitations …………………………………………………………………………….. 5 1.5 Structure of the Report…………………………………………………………………………….. 5
II. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK…………………………………………………………………. 7
2.1 Knowledge Management ……………………………………………………………………………. 7
2.2 Information versus Knowledge……………………………………………………………………. 9 2.3 Classifications of Knowledge ……………………………………………………………………. 10
2.3.1 Tacit and Explicit Knowledge ……………………………………………………………. 11
2.3.2 Individual and Collective Knowledge …………………………………………………. 12
2.4 Knowledge Creation and Transfer……………………………………………………………… 13
2.4.1 Four Modes of Knowledge Creation and Transfer ……………………………….. 13
2.4.2 The Concept of Ba ……………………………………………………………………………. 16
2.5 Knowledge Management at Pr oject-Specific Environments ………………………….. 17
2.5.1 The Project Management Processes …………………………………………………… 17
2.5.2 Definition of Project Performance …………………………………………………….. 18
2.5.3 Knowledge at Projects ……………………………………………………………………… 19
2.6 Tools of Knowledge Cr eation and Transfer…………………………………………………. 20
2.6.1 The Importance of Organisational Structures ……………………………………… 21
2.6.1.1 Organisational Culture…………………………………………………………………… 22 2.6.1.2 Reward Systems……………………………………………………………………………. 23 2.6.1.3 Management Support…………………………………………………………………….. 23 2.6.2 Communication ……………………………………………………………………………….. 24
2.6.3 Lessons Learned ……………………………………………………………………………… 25
2.6.4 Mentoring and Social Networks ………………………………………………………… 26
2.6.5 Information Technology ……………………………………………………………………. 27
2.7 Summary and Discussion………………………………………………………………………….. 28
III. APPLICATION: THE PROJECT XY …………………………………………………………. 30
3.1 The Case Study Project XY ………………………………………………………………………. 30
3.2 Knowledge Management Project at XY ……………………………………………………… 32
IV. EMPIRICAL FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS…………………………………………………. 34
4.1 Current Knowledge Management Practices…………………………………………………. 35
4.2 Organisational Structures………………………………………………………………………….. 37
4.2.1 Organisational Culture ……………………………………………………………………. 37
4.2.2 Reward Systems ……………………………………………………………………………… 40
4.3 Communication……………………………………………………………………………………….. 42 4.4 Mentoring Programmes and Social Networks ……………………………………………… 46 4.5 Information Technology …………………………………………………………………………… 48

iii4.6 Analysis of the Four Modes………………………………………………………………………. 50
4.7 Summary and Discussion of Analysis ………………………………………………………… 52
V. RECOMMENDATIONS……………………………………………………………………………… 53
5.1 Identification of Knowledge Management Strategy……………………………………… 53
5.2 Information Technology as Support Function……………………………………………… 54 5.3 The Importance of Project Structures …………………………………………………………. 54
5.3.1 Project Culture ……………………………………………………………………………….. 55
5.3.2 Team Diversity ………………………………………………………………………………… 55
5.3.3 Reward Systems ………………………………………………………………………………. 56
5.4 Communication……………………………………………………………………………………….. 57 5.5 Summary of Recommendations…………………………………………………………………. 58
VI. CONCLUSIONS AND FURT HER RESEARCH………………………………………….. 59
VII. BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………………………………….. 61

ivTABLE OF APPENDICES

Appendix I: Spain’s Infrastruc ture Plan of Transportation…………………………………….. 68
Appendix II: Methodology ………………………………………………………………………………… 69 Appendix III: Interview Guide…………………………………………………………………………….. 71

vTABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Research Questions ………………………………………………………………………………… 4
Figure 2: Structure of the Report ……………………………………………………………………………. 6 Figure 3: Information versus Knowledge ………………………………………………………………. 10 Figure 4: Knowledge Conversion Model……………………………………………………………….. 15 Figure 5: Project Mana gement Processes ………………………………………………………………. 17
Figure 6: Keywords and Tools……………………………………………………………………………… 21 Figure 7: Fact Sheet of XY ………………………………………………………………………………….. 31 Figure 8: Key Questions for Lessons Learned Session ……………………………………………. 57

viABBREVIATIONS

AG Aktiengesellschaft (German: Public Limited Company)
AVE Alta Velocidad Española (Spanish High-Speed)
E España
e.g. exempli gratia (Latin: for example)
IBM International Business Machines
ICE InterCityExpress (High-speed train in Germany)
i.e. id est (Latin: that is)
kph kilometres per hour
PIT Plan Infraestructure Transporte (Infrastructure Plan of Transportation)
RENFE Red Nacional de los Ferrocarriles Es pañoles (National Spanish Railway
Network)
S.A. Sociedad Anónima (S panish: Public Limited Company)
SECI Model: Socialisati on, Externalisation, Combin ation, Internalisation

vii

“In an economy where the only certainty is uncertainty,
the one sure source of last ing competitive advantage
is knowledge” (Non aka, 1991, p. 546).

Introduction
1I. INTRODUCTION

The aim of this section is to provide backg round information about the researched area.
In the beginning, the concept of knowledge as a key to sustainable competitive advantage
will be examined. This is followed by the pr oblem discussion and some of the obstacles
related to knowledge transfer between proj ects. Further on, the objectives and research
questions will be presented. As a final note of this section, the limitations and the
structure of the report will be introduced.

1.1 Background
Over the past several years there have been intensive discussions about the importance of
managing knowledge within organi sations (Davenport et al., 1998).
Most organisations are aware that in toda y’s highly competitive environment managing
their knowledge effectively is the only way to achieve sust ainable competitive advantage
(Drucker, 2001). To achieve this advantage, the ability to cr eate, capture, transfer (share)
and apply knowledge is essential (Davenport and Prusak, 1998).
One of the primary areas to which this knowledge management approach could be
applied the field of project management.
In recent years the number of tasks and the amount of work within a company, which are
managed in projects, is growing immensely (D isterer, 2002). This trend is increasing
because key characteristics of project organi sations address success factors of companies:
high flexibility, interdisciplin ary work, and promoting innova tion (Katzy et al., 2000).
An increasing number of organisations at di fferent business sectors are adopting a project
approach to carry out a ra nge of vital operational and innovative activities, and the
influence of project-based activ ities on overall company perf ormance keeps intensifying.
Consequently, the significance of excellent perf ormance in the management of projects is
also increasing.

Introduction
2Demanding environmental pressures, uncertain ty, shrinking time for projects, decreasing
time to market for project results and high qua lity requirements are influencing the ability
of organisation to perform successful project management (Disterer, 2002). Therefore,
gained knowledge from projects is an impor tant resource for following projects because
projects solve innovative a nd interdisciplinary tasks .

1.2 Definition of the Problem
Most organisations are running projects wher e valuable knowledge is gained, including
success and failures, lessons learned and be st practices. However, the majority of
organisations do not capture, manage or us e the information they gain through their
projects. Another related problem is the fact, that most project managers do not explicitly
budget for resources to perform knowle dge transfers (Alderman et al., 2001).
What occurs to knowledge gained after the co mpletion of a project and at the beginning
of the next project? Learni ng from the past is how thi ngs should work, but it rarely
happens. Failure to transfer gained knowledge from former projects to future projects
leads to wasted ‘reinventing the wheel’ activi ties. Thee organisations incur new expenses
as they search for similar solutions and rep eat mistakes of past problems (Tiwana, 1999).
Therefore, an important concern is how to generate knowledge for a given project in a
way that makes it available not only during the projec t and to other projects, but also to
future projects (Katzy et al., 2000). In contrast, there exist various challenges fo r knowledge transfer in project environment.
Significant barriers include the dissolving of a project team, lack of formal management
support, an inadequate project culture and essentially the reluctance of employees for
knowledge sharing. The discussion about the importance of knowledge in projects has become of interest
since there has been an increase of project approaches at organisa tions. However, very
little published research deal s directly with the issue of knowledge management at
projects.

Introduction
3Furthermore, traditional project management literature still offers a limited view of
knowledge and knowledge management. But this view is understand able considering
certain differences between project manage ment and knowledge management. First,
projects are by nature finite endeavours, whereas knowledge is a resource that should stay
around as long it is useable, typically far beyond the life of a single project (Katzy et al.,
2000). Second, project management is goal orie nted and happens in spite of potential
differences in culture, whether it is at the le vel of project teams, organisations, or even
national entities (Katzy et al ., 2000). Moreover, projects also create their own distinct
team and culture. Knowledge management, on the other hand, is not necessarily an end
itself. Knowledge is generate d and shared as project activities occur where the socio-
cultural context has an important influence on this process (Leseure and Brookes, 2004).
In conclusion, this report adopts the viewpoint that knowledge management is a fundamental basis of project management. Projects create the necessity to manage
knowledge across time and in a multi-context setting, because knowledge has proven to
be one of the most critical enablers within a project. Ther efore, project knowledge should
be captured and retained so that other projects can re trieve and apply the knowledge to
future tasks. Companies not securing system atically knowledge gain ed in projects for
later usage, risk to reinvent solutions, re peat mistakes and incur unnecessary expense to
relearn the same lessons (Tiwana, 1999).

1.3 Objectives and Research Questions
At this report knowledge management will be ap proached from the perspective of project
management. The main objective is to define how knowledge management within a project can be enhanced by
‰ analysing suitable tools of eff ective knowledge management from
relevant theories and
‰ creating a framework to enable an d support a transfer of knowledge
across project frontiers.

Introduction
4As exposed in the definition of the problem, there exist several challenges to ensure the
essential process of knowledge transfer after the completion of a project. To investigate
these challenges, this report will try to answer the fo llowing questions (figure 1).

Research Questions

How can knowledge be captured and transf erred to enhance project performance?
1) Which theoretical tools do influence the processes of knowledge capture and transfer?
2) Which activities does the project team accom plish to capture and transfer knowledge?

Figure 1: Research Questions
Source: Own

The main question is viewed from management perspective in order to determine areas of
improvement for managerial practices. The purpo se of the two sub questions is to answer
the key question based on the findings of the literature review as well as the case study.
In order to respond th e first sub question, Nonaka a nd Takeuchi’s (1995) model of
knowledge conversion is presente d and discussed. Tools are de rived from this model to
establish a theoretical framework on how to improve knowledge management processes
in a project-specific context to improve performance. In the practical part the anal ysis of a project should crea te the understanding to answer
the second sub question. The research in the pr actical part of this report is based on a
long-term engineering project at XXX: the high-speed train project XY.
The findings of both parts might determine th e solution for the main objective: to give
recommendations on how to implement an effective knowledge management programme
at the project XY in order to improve project performance and secure the knowledge gained during the project for further high-speed train projects at XXX.

Introduction
51.4 Scope and Limitations
When analysing knowledge management proce sses in a project-specific environment,
there are important facts to consider. First, due to the main objective of this report, the focus is mainly on the process of knowledge transfer (sharing) in a project-specific contex t, not on the whole knowledge
management process. Moreover, a Japanese model will be applied to a Spanish subsidiary
of XXX Germany, assuming that this model is applicable to the organisational and
national cultures of the investigated case.

Finally, this report will adopt a holistic approach to knowledge management, e.g.
addressing not only technology solutions but mainly concentrating on human-specific
factors within the project environment.

1.5 Structure of the Report
The first chapter of this re port encompasses the introduction to the problem, the main
objectives and research questions. The function of these re search questions is to enable
the link between the research part and the pur pose of the report. The parts of this report
are summarised at figure 2.

Introduction
6
Figure 2: Structure of the Report
Source: Own

The methodology used for this report is explai ned in Appendix II, and the interview guide
employed for the collection of empirical data can be found in Appendix III.
Chapter 1:
Background and Objectives
Chapter 2:
Theoretical Framework

– Theoretical Background
– Model and Theories on
Knowledge Creation and
Transfer
– Project-specific Aspects
Chapter 3:
Application: Project XY

Chapter 4:
Empirical Findings
and Anal ysis
Chapter 5:
Recommendations

Chapter 6:
Conclusions and
Further Research The first chapter encompasses the background, the definition of the
problem, the objectives as well as the
research questions.

Chapter 2 provides the theoretical
background. Differences and
classification of knowledge are presented. The second part describes a
model on knowledge creation and
transfer. Project-sp ecific aspects are
considered when deriving tools from
theory. As a final note, the applied
model and tools are discussed.

At this chapter a presentation of XXX
and the case study is given. The main
research problem is defined from a managerial view.

The research results are presented here according to the structure of the
theoretical part. Each section is followed by an analysis.

Recommendations are given here to
the studied project on how to improve
knowledge capture and transfer.

Conclusions are presented which
answer the main research question and
refer back to the purpose of the report. Additionally, a proposal for further
research is
given.

Theoretical Framework
7 II. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

In order to determine whether the concep t of knowledge management is a necessary
approach for improving project perf ormance, or if it is just ‘the emperor in new clothes’,
a review of various literature sources is necessary. This chapter focuses on the
theoretical framework of knowledge transfer and is divided into two sections. The first
illustrates on a theoretical background of knowledge transfer. Issues like general
knowledge management, a comparison of inform ation and knowledge as well as different
classifications of knowledge are discussed at this part. The second one addresses the
discussion of Nonaka and Takeuchi’s (1995) model of knowledge creation and transfer.
Further, project-specific aspects for knowle dge management will be discussed. As a final
note, tools will be derived from the theore tical models and analysed. This chapter should
provide the answer to the first sub-question aske d in this report “Which theoretical tools
do influence the processes of knowledge capture and transfer?”

2.1 Knowledge Management
There are forces of change such as globali sation, new technology, in creased competition,
different costumer demands, and changing eco nomic and political structures which are
reshaping businesses. Companies and academ ics have highlighted the importance of
knowledge as the basis of competitive advantage (Drucker, 2001; Boisot, 1998).
Numerous organisations are recognising that te chnology-based competitive advantages
are temporary and that the only ones are the employees (Black and Synan, 1997) and their knowledge. Though, knowledge has always been a valuable asset but what is
knowledge management?

Knowledge management is a fast-moving field th at has been created by the collision of
several others such as human resources, or ganisational development, and information
technology (Bukowitz and Williams, 1999).

Theoretical Framework
8 The growth of this strategy has emerged fr om two fundamental shifts: downsizing and
technological development (DiMattia and Oder, 1997).
For this report, knowledge ma nagement is defined as “the process by which the
organisations generate wealth from its intellectual or knowledge-based assets”
(Bukowitz and Williams, 1999, p. 2). It is main ly characterised by four processes:
generation, capture, transfer (s haring) and application of kno wledge (Alavi and Leidner,
2001). Knowledge management has received a widespr ead attention in recen t years, but despite
of the its popularity of as a source of competitive advantag e, its literature has been
criticised for a lack of empirical evidence and the st rong emphasis on the conversion of
individual knowledge into organisational knowledge through the use of information
technology (Pan and Scarbrough, 1999). Moreover, the concept of the ‘management’ of knowledge has also been subject of
intensive debate. Some critic s argue that knowledge, due to its intangibility, cannot be
managed. However, organisations have prev iously applied the management of other
intangible phenomena, e.g. motivation or creativity (Davenport and Völpel, 2001).

It is useful to consider knowledge management progra mmes in the context of the
resource-based view of the company (Penrose, 1959). The knowledge-based view,
foreseen by Drucker (1988), is a further develo pment of the resource-based view focusing
on knowledge as an organisational resource (Grant, 1991). It has originated the
discussion of knowledge management systems and the role of information technology for
management strategy and competitive advantage (Alavi and Leidner, 2001). While the knowledge-based view focuse s mainly on information technology, many
scholars agree that knowledge by itself cannot be the source of competitive advantage
(Grant, 1996). In contrast to this technology-driven view, some authors have suggested
that the novel contribution of knowledge ma nagement is to reveal the importance of
collaboration at all levels of collectiv e forms of work (von Krogh and Roos, 1996).

Theoretical Framework
9 Consistent with these new interpretations, th e underlying concept of this report focuses
on the critical role of the human fact or in knowledge management programmes,
considering these initiatives not only as a tec hnological phenomenon. Th is is according
with Chase (1997) who argued that knowledge management is mainly about
“encouraging people to share knowledge and id eas to create valu e-adding products and
services” (ibid, p. 84).
The practice of knowledge management has benefited from several key concepts,
although the majority were not created w ithin the knowledge ma nagement movement.
Relevant key concepts will be described in the following.

2.2 Information versus Knowledge
In literature three concepts of knowledge are commonly used: data, information and
knowledge. A hierarchy can be perceived from data over information to knowledge with each stage
possessing different values of context, usefulne ss, and interpretability (Alavi and Leidner,
2001). These types of knowledge form a so-cal led ‘knowledge value chain’ (Shankar et
al., 2003). Here, data is defined a set of discre te facts about events, transaction records or
numbers (Shankar et al., 2003). By adding cer tain context, data transforms to
information. According to Davenport and Prus ak (1998) knowledge is a mix of framed
experience, values, and contextual informa tion that provides a framework for evaluating
and incorporating new experiences and inform ation. In organisations, it often becomes
imbedded not only in documents but also in or ganisational routines, processes, practices,
and norms (ibid, 1998). For the purpose of th is report the definition given by Davenport
and Prusak (1998) will be adopted due to its general acceptance and applicability.
From a theoretical view it appears fairly simple to separate the concepts of data, information and knowledge. In the practical area distinction between these terms are
often used interchangeably.

Theoretical Framework
10 The multinational organisation IBM, for in stance, focuses mainly on tacit knowledge
(Snowden, 2003). In order to outline the diffe rence between knowledge and information,
IBM communicates its vision in the following manner (figure 3):

“The story I most frequently use to distinguish between knowledge and
information is to use the metaphor of a map and a human guide.
A map is a set of data organized into a coherent and reusable form – it is
information. The guide, on the other hand, is knowledgeable. She does not need
to consult a map, takes into recent experience and has the ability to relate my
ability to her knowledge of the terrain. Th e guide is the fastest way to achieve
my objective, provided that I trust her. If I do not have the trust, and am not
prepared to take the risk of experimentat ion, then I will fall back on information
– the map.
I t s h o u l d a l s o b e n o t e d t h a t s o m e o n e w i t h k n o w l e d g e o f t h e t e r r i t o r y h a s
created the map. If I share the same cu lture and background as the mapmaker
then I am able to use the information. A different background may mean that
the map is just data – useless stuff without context.”

Figure 3: Information versus Knowledge
Source: Snowden (2003)

2.3 Classifications of Knowledge
Numerous ways of classifyi ng and describing the concept of knowledge can be found in
literature. Nonaka and Takeuc hi’s (1995) theory, for instan ce, illustrates the difference
between tacit and explicit knowledge and th e division of indivi dual from collective
knowledge. In contrast, Penrose (1959) stresses on objective and experimental
knowledge, while Hayek (1945) separates betw een scientific and practical knowledge.
This section will mainly focus on the first two classifications of Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995). Throughout the report, these types of knowledge will appear in the theoretical as
well in the empirical study. The mentioned cla ssifications of tacit versus explicit and
individual versus collective knowledge have also a high impact on the discussion about
knowledge transfer.

Theoretical Framework
11 2.3.1 Tacit and Explicit Knowledge
Most knowledge experts agree that there are two specific types of knowledge (Havens
and Knapp, 1999). The challenge in knowledge management, however, is to determine
how each knowledge type can be codified and transferred in an organisation.
The concepts of tacit and e xplicit knowledge were introduced by the philosopher Polanyi
(1962) with his theory about pe rsonal knowledge. His statement “we can know more than
we can tell” (ibid, p. 4) implies that tacit and e xplicit knowledge should be seen as
inseparable dimensions of knowing, outlin ing the assumption that certain knowledge
cannot be expressed and formulated explicitly. The Japanese knowledge manage ment scholars, Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) describe
Polanyi’s two concepts in more precise termi nology. According to them , an individual or
an organisation can possess tacit and explicit knowledge. The latter is easily articulated,
coded and transferred and is wr itten or recorded in manuals, patents, reports, documents,
assessments, and databases (ibid, 1994). This suggests that explic it knowledge can be
transferred through more technology-driven, st ructured processes such as information
systems (Hansen et. al, 1999). Tacit knowledge on the other hand, is more di fficult to articulate and derives from
individual experiences. It is essentially related to human action and unlike information, it
consists about beliefs and commitment. Ther efore, it is highly contextual and culture-
bound (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995). This fact suggests that taci t knowledge may be
transferred through interpersonal means and us ing less structures processes. Mentoring,
teamwork, personal intranets, opportunities for personal communications such as group
dialogue, or personal reflecti ons on experiences as lessons learned sessions are common
examples.
However, both structured, technology-based approaches and less structured, personal-
based processes are necessary for effectiv e knowledge transfer. Organisations should
consider the knowledge as a critical factor when deciding about the process to transfer
knowledge.

Theoretical Framework
12 2.3.2 Individual and Collective Knowledge
Additionally to the divisi on between implicit and e xplicit knowledge, a second
classification of knowledge is described by No naka and Takeuchi (1995): individual and
organisational. They argue, similar to Pola nyi’s (1967) theory, th at knowledge can only
be generated by an individual and that orga nisational knowledge re presents collective
knowledge, i.e. knowledge that is shared an d transformed by individuals within the
organisation. This is described ironically in the statement ‘if organisations only knew
what they know’ (Pfeffer and Sutton, 2000). According to Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) knowledge value is created through the
transformation between tacit to explicit knowle dge and vice versa. They describe this as
an ever evolving knowledge spiral that move s from individual tacit knowledge to explicit
organisational-wide knowledge (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995). Consequently, an
organisation which aims to implement stra tegic knowledge management, should focus on
capitalising individual knowle dge and turn as much of it into organisational knowledge
(Davenport and Prusak, 1998). Contrary to this view, Brown and Duguid (1991 ) state that knowledge is created and held
collectively in communities of practice. Von Hippel (1994) refers to this knowledge as
sticky, since it evolves from the interaction of practitioners and is difficult transferred
outside these communities. To exploit this knowledge, the problem solving needs to be
moved into the community instead of trying to transfer the knowledge away from it (von
Hippel, 1994). Does this assumption imply th at transferring knowle dge between projects
is impossible?
The above mentioned discussion demonstrates that scholars diverge to some degree
where knowledge resides. Consequently, there exist difficulties to clarify where
knowledge capturing, sharing and transfer oc cur. This problem involves managerial
implications, for instance, to determina tion of the measurabil ity and control of
knowledge. The next section will provide a deep er insight into how knowledge is created
and transferred.

Theoretical Framework
13 2.4 Knowledge Creation and Transfer
For the project to manage knowledge, the fo cus should be on the pr ocesses of creating
and transferring (sharing) knowledge. Therefore th is section is a fundamental part of this
report. Nonaka and Takeuchi’s (1995) model ‘the four m odes of knowledge conversion’
is presented and discussed. Ba sed on this model and consider ing particular aspects of
projects, tools are derived to establish a theoretical framework on how to enhance
knowledge management processes in a projec t-specific environment to improve project
performance. Before introducing this model, it should be not ed that this report assumes that the creation
of knowledge also involves the transfer of knowledge and vi ce versa. This view supports
the opinion of Davenport and Prusak (1998 ). They claim that unless knowledge is
absorbed, it cannot be tran sferred, and merely making know ledge available does not
mean that include its transfer . Therefore in this report, the terms knowledge creation and
transfer (sharing) are used in the same manne r, adopting the view that these processes are
interlinked and cannot be differentiated clearly.
2.4.1 Four Modes of Knowle dge Creation and Transfer
The process-oriented approach considers knowle dge creation and transf er as a continuous
process between people and tec hnology as well as tacit and e xplicit knowledge. Prahalad
and Hamel (1990) and Earl (1997) adhere am ong others to this view, but the process-
oriented approach mainly takes its starti ng point in the research of Nonaka (1994).
Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) developed the Knowledge Conversion Model or SECI
model in order to examine four distinctive conversion processes between the tacit and
explicit knowledge. The SECI model functions through the interaction between tacit and
explicit knowledge and its purpose is to height en the quality and increase the quantity of
knowledge (Nonaka et al., 2000). The model c onsists of four di fferent interacting
processes (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995):

Theoretical Framework
14
1) Socialisation (from tacit to tacit) refers to the transfer of tacit knowledge between
individuals. Tacit knowledge can be acquired through sharin g experiences in a certain
context or by observation. In a business setting this is similar to apprentice learning or mentoring programmes
.
2) Externalisation (from tacit to explicit) is considered as a knowledge creation process
in which tacit knowledge becomes explicit by using metaphors, concepts or models.
Methods as dialogue and collective reflection play an important role. The
externalisation process allows knowledge transfer among individuals within a group.
3) Combination (from explicit to explicit) is seen as a process of systemising concepts
into a knowledge structure. Key pieces are documents , databases , and meetings where
explicit knowledge is interchanged. In a business setting, for instance, combination occurs when management break down co rporate goals of th e organisations and
visions to operational goals or the presen tation of organisational documents on the
intranet. The process of combination allows knowledge transfer among groups across
organisations.
4) Internalisation (from explicit to tacit) in a business setting is similar to the concept of
‘learning-by-doing’. Knowledge is verbalised into manuals
or through oral stories .
The internalisation process transfers organisational and gr oup knowledge to the
individual.
The interacting processes are part of th e Knowledge Conversion or SECI model,
presented in the following figure 4.

Theoretical Framework
15

Figure 4: Knowledge Conversion Model
Source: Nonaka and Konno (1998, p. 43)

The SECI model describes organisational knowledge creation as a dynamic process
involving a continual interaction between e xplicit and tacit dimension of knowledge
through processes of socialis ation, externalisa tion, combination and internalisation.
Nonaka and Konno (1998) illustra te this transformation as a knowledge spiral . This spiral
can commence from any of the four modes, but generally begins with socialisation. The
knowledge base is growing with the cons tant movement of the knowledge spiral.

Theoretical Framework
16 Two approaches to knowledge transfer exis t based on the distinction of tacit versus
explicit knowledge (Hansen et al., 1999). The codification approach is used by companies
which rely mainly on repositories of exp licit knowledge; contrary, the personalisation
approach implies the principal idea that knowl edge transfer occurs at interactions
between individuals (Hansen et al., 1999). Both are considered at this report, although the main empha sis is on the personalisation
approach agreeing w ith Davenport and Völpel ’s (2001) statement “Managing knowledge
is managing people; managing pe ople is managing knowledge” (ibid, p. 218).

2.4.2 The Concept of Ba
To address the question of fundamental condi tions, i.e. having an enabling context, of
knowledge processes, Nonaka and Konno (1998) introduced the concept of ‘ba’, a
Japanese word for place. They proposed that different types of ‘ba’ act as promoters of different knowledge processes. Ba can inte rpreted as a shared space for emerging
relationships within a physical space (office, dispersed business space) , a virtual (e-mail,
teleconference), mental (social networks, shar ed ideas, models), or any combination of
them (Nonaka and Konno, 1998). Thus, the orig inating ‘ba’ is s uggested to promote
socialisation. Socialisation within the appropr iate ‘ba’ provides a significant platform for
natural interaction to transfer knowledge (H andzic et al., 2004).
For this report, organisational structures will be analysed as a factor derived from the
model of having an enabling context or the appropriate ‘ba’. Orga nisational structures
(the enabling context) are, for instan ce, emphasised through organisational culture
,
reward systems and generally, management support . Due to the fact that these aspects
belong to Nonaka and Konno’s (1998) ‘ba’ of shared ideas and model, they will be
integrated as essential tools fo r knowledge capture and transfer.

Theoretical Framework
17 2.5 Knowledge Management at Project-Specific Environments
Although the preceding section onl y forms a small part of the huge amount of literature
on knowledge management, there are remaining ar eas such as the project-specific aspects
that deserve additional discussion. In the management oriented literature, a number of academics and practitioners have
expressed an interest in th e relationship between knowledge management and project
management. However, these original c ontributions provide only limited, anecdotal
information for organisations that aim to improve their capability to manage knowledge in project environments. Therefore, in th is section, the viewpoint will be on some
essential project-specific asp ects for knowledge management.

2.5.1 The Project Management Processes
The project management encompasses severa l processes such as project initiation,
planning, executing, controlling and closing processes which are carried out by a project
team within a particular period (Project Ma nagement Institute, 2000). These processes are
shown in figure 5 below.

Figu re 5: Project Management Processes
Source: Project Management Institute (2000, adapted)

Closing

Controlling

Executing
Planning

Initiation
Project
Management

Theoretical Framework
18 During these project processes, knowledge is created and transferred. There is evidence
that the process of project closing is beco ming the most important phase to identify,
capture and prepare knowledge for transfer to other projects (Disterer, 2001).
Knowledge management processes in projects, here especially knowledge transfer at the
project closing phase, have been identified as disregarded areas. The potential needs of
following projects are not within the focus of applied project management procedures in
practical environment. For instance, project s that are involved in the production of
complex products and systems have particular knowledge management needs. However,
companies have found out that here the codi fication of good practice and lessons learned
sessions are incomplete (McDermott, 1999).
2.5.2 Definition of Project Performance
The purpose of this report is to evidence that knowledge manage ment, particularly
knowledge transfer, and the application of tools, derived from knowledge management
models, at project might improve project pe rformance. But how ca n project performance
be defined? Traditionally, project performance is seen as meeting cost and time objectives (Meredith
and Mantel, 1985). Scholars investigated seve ral dimensions of project success with
common agreement that project performan ce needs to reflect more than on these
traditional objectives. In reviewing academic studies and anecdotal reports, Nicholas
(1989) concluded that the sati sfaction of the key project st akeholders, for instance the
customers and users, was the overriding meas ure of successful project performance. More
recent research arrives at the same conclu sion (Tukel and Rom, 2001).The definition of
successful project performance is more widened, reflecting the multidimensional aspects of a project, the satisfaction of multiple stakeholders, and the quality of product as well as
process (Bryde, 2003).

Theoretical Framework
19 Therefore, theoretical justification is given for the main objective of this report.
Successful knowledge management initiatives can be included as one key factor for
project performance as they sa tisfy the need of the main key project stakeholders, the
organisation and its employees.

2.5.3 Knowledge at Projects
There exists a broad range of relevant knowledge resulti ng from projects. Important
knowledge to retain is, for instance, the use of project-spec ific information technology
tools which have been employed for the first time in the organisation. Another important
knowledge could be about business procedur es, which are identified and documented
during the project. Regarding the cooperation with external partners su ch as suppliers or
sub-contractors, knowledge about special skills, strengths a nd weaknesses, timeliness of
delivery or accuracy can be of important value for further projects (Disterer, 2002).
Disterer (2002), for instance, provides a comprehensive discussion of the knowledge
management problems faced by informati on technology project organisations and
provides some recommendations: post-project review proce sses or so-called lessons
learned, project files and know-who databases, also defined as yellow pages .

Knowledge of how to ensure project succes s and of previous solutions helps the
management meet project specifications of cost, schedule, and performance (Kotnour,
2000). However, project information and knowl edge is rarely captured and retained
during and especially at the end of a project in order to allow organisational members
retrieve and apply them to future tasks (Weiser and Morrison, 1998). There is a broad range of reasons: organisational, technical, me thodical issues as well as social problems
to be addressed and discussed (Disterer, 2001). The challenge of applying knowledge
gained in one project to others is an ongoi ng problem, and appears to have more to do
with the knowing embodied in individuals (C ook and Brown, 1999). It certainly appears
to be easier when the same project teams are reassembled for subsequent projects, but with changes in personnel ‘le ssons learned’ appear to be forgotten (Bartezzaghi et al.,
1997). This suggests that the embodied knowledge may be more important and difficult
to capture than it is presented in literature.

Theoretical Framework
20 Consistent with the above assumptions, this report stresses mainly on structural barriers
such as organisational culture s that promote behaviour of sharing knowledge as well as
the presence of reward systems to provide in centives for knowledge transfer (O'Dell and
Grayson, 1998). With these considerations in mind, tools will be presente d and discussed in the next
section to put emphasis on effective know ledge management in project-specific
environment.
2.6 Tools of Knowledge Creation and Transfer
The purpose of this section is to present and discuss tools which can promote knowledge
creation and transfer. The reason why these particular tools have been chosen is
explained more in section 2.7. The structure of this part can also be distinguished in the
section of empirical findings and analysis. The four modes of Nonaka and Takeuchi’s ( 1995) model provide a theoretical description
of how knowledge is created and transferred. In each of the four modes key factors of
knowledge creation and transfer were highlight ed. These aspects have been recognised by
Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) and von Krogh et al. (1998) as important for knowledge
creation and transfer. Furthermore, the idea of an enabling context, the so-called ‘ba’, is
also taken into account. Nona ka and Takeuchi (1995) argue that once the appropriate
organisation structures are in place, they can help create a favourable environment for
knowledge transfer. However, there are additio nal factors deriving from the theory of
project management such as lessons lear ned, which are considered important for
knowledge creation and transfer in a project-specific environment.
Below, the highlighted aspects are discus sed and regrouped into particular tools.
Moreover, they will be analysed also in de tail at the practical part of this report.

Theoretical Framework
21 KEYWORDS TOOLS
Organisational culture
Reward systems
Management support Organisational Structures
Dialogue (Oral stories)
Meetings
Collective reflection (lessons
learned) Communication
On-the-job training
Social networks Mentoring Programmes and
Social Networks
Databases (Manuals)
Project files / Yellow pages
Intranet Information Technology
Figure 6: Keywords and Tools
Source: Own

2.6.1 The Importance of Organisational Structures
Many companies have adopted knowledge ma nagement strategies including both
information technology and organisational st ructures, of which organisational culture,
appropriate incentives and mana gement support are part of.
Zack (1999) argues that the success of knowledge management is influenced by culture,
management philosophy, and reward systems:
“…effective knowledge creation, sharing, and leveraging requires an
organizational climate and reward system that value and encourage cooperation,
trust, learning, and innovations and pr ovides incentives for engaging in those
knowledge-based roles, activities and pro cesses. I have consistently observed this
aspect to be a major obstacle to effec tive knowledge management” (ibid, p. 55).

In agreement with this statement, these ke y tools will be discussed in the context of
having an enabling context or the appropriate ‘ba’ for effective knowledge management.

Theoretical Framework
22 2.6.1.1 Organisational Culture
Various researchers have found out that or ganisational culture is important for the
success of knowledge management practices. Orga nisational culture is defined here as
‘the organisation’s expectations and the rewa rded structures which help to communicate
the organisation values to the organisatio nal members’ (Ramabadron et al., 1997).

Von Krogh (1998) argues that some organisa tional cultures are mo re favourable than
others when fostering knowledge transfer and distinguishes between low and high-care
environment. According to von Krogh (1998) typical characterist ics of a low-care
environment are untrustworthy behaviour, consta nt competition, imbalances in giving and
receiving information and a ‘tha t is not my job’ attitude. These characteristics endanger
effective sharing of tacit know ledge, since they might d ecrease the participation and
interaction between people, which is often requi red for the transfer of tacit knowledge. In
a high-care environment, on the other hand, a high degree of cooperation and
collaboration exists, both critical for knowle dge transfer. This type of environment or
culture can assist to accelerate communicati on processes by allowing individuals to share
knowledge and ideas within the group (von Krogh, 1998).

Other scholars have discussed more specif ic aspects of the organisational culture
(Davenport and Prusak, 1998). For the pro cess of knowledge sharing, for instance,
following aspects of organisational culture are essential: trust, common cultures, vocabularies, meeting times and places, absorpti ve capacity in recipients, absence of the
‘not-invented-here’ syndrome, and tolerance for mistakes (Davenport and Prusak, 1998).
For instance, research has begun to ex amine knowledge transf er in terms of
characteristics of the knowle dge recipient. Szulanski (1 996) claims, that knowledge
transfer is not a ‘copy and paste’ activity between individuals or groups. A recipient’s
lack of motivation, abso rptive capacity, and reten tive ability can result in poor transfer of
knowledge (ibid, 1996).

Thus, the principal challenge for knowledge management is not technical but cultural.
Therefore, establishing a strong corporate cu lture with high trust and cooperative climate
should be the aim of any organisa tion to enhance knowledge transfer.

Theoretical Framework
23 2.6.1.2 Reward Systems
As previously mentioned in the preceding section, an additional enabling context or
structure to support knowledge creation and tran sfer is a reward system. It highlights
organisational key issues and considers the time and efforts that employees spend in sharing knowledge in their perfor mance and career.
Hansen et al. (1999) argue that incentives play a key role in the knowledge sharing process. They propose that personal rewa rd systems must support the organisational
culture of sharing knowledge (ibid, 1999). Si milar to this view, Bartlett and Goshal
(1998) suggest that one way to encourage knowledge transfer is to base rewards on more
than exclusively financial success. Financial rewarding merely tends to encourage competition and lack of sharing. Measurements and reward systems that favour a more balanced ‘scorecard’, by taking into account collaboration and the sharing of best
practices, can play a critical role (Bartlett and Goshal, 1998). In this context, a high-care
environment might be encouraged by impl ementing a team based incentive system,
which rewards actions that contribute to knowledge creation (von Krogh, 1999). The
social nature of the project’s incentives to create, capture and transfer personal
knowledge is the key factor to maintain this knowledge management model in an
organisation. This is consistent with O’Dell and Grayson (1998) who state that reward for
sharing is required to sustai n organisational cult ure. Highly motivated individuals can
efficiently codify knowledge if appropriate incentives are in place (Brown and Stareky,
2000). The aim should be to include sharing kn owledge as a general part of performance
appraisal.
2.6.1.3 Management Support
Generally, management support is a key f actor for knowledge transfer along formal
structures within an orga nisation (McDermott and O’Dell, 2001). Similar to knowledge
management literature, also the project ma nagement literature stresses constantly the
importance of management support and strong or ganisational culture fo r any project is to
be completed successfully (Baker et al., 1983).

Theoretical Framework
24 Management should align knowledge processes w ith organisational culture and link it to
project goals, problems and results when ai ming for successful knowledge management
efforts in a project environment.
2.6.2 Communication
There exist several forms of communication at organisations to exchange explicit and
implicit information and knowledge between employees. Explicit as well implicit
communication occurs in an organisational context wh ich is determined by the
organisational culture, systems, and the manage ment practices (Hoogerv orst et al., 2004).
For this report, forms of communication su ch as dialogue, meetings and collective
reflection (e.g. lessons learned sessions) were chosen as these represent suitable tools to
encourage knowledge cr eation and transfer.
Davenport and Prusak (1998) recommend dialogue as the key method to share and
transfer knowledge. This can involve any num ber of informal or formal settings and
practices: Water cooler chats, fairs, conferen ces or any forums with direct face-to-face
contact are identified as the most eff ective (ibid, 1998). Through formal group
discussions and conversations, employees can exchange and reflect upon each other’s
ideas. By assigning a person who manages the group discussions, the organisation can
maintain a certain formal structure of th ese meetings. According to von Krogh et al.
(1998), this is one of the best ways to share tacit knowledge although it is often
overlooked by organisations. Another main aspect for effective knowledge transfer is horizont al communication. Goh
(2002) argues that co mmunication flows are st ill vertically at organisations, with
employees being able to get in touch with superiors and vice versa. On the other hand,
there are very few flows across people of th e same hierarchical levels. The solution for
sharing knowledge is to foster horizontal communications flows (Goh, 2002). This view
is similar with Nonaka (1994) who states that breaching down hierarchies in the
organisation enables knowledge transfer.

Theoretical Framework
25 One of the most effective communication tools for projects which enclose a collective
reflection on a horizontal comm unication base are so-called le ssons learned sessions. Due
to its importance, the next section will discuss this tool in detail.
2.6.3 Lessons Learned
Recent literature indicates that the stage of project closing is becoming the most
important phase to identify, capture and prepare knowledge for a transfer to other
projects. One possible way to capture the resu lt of such collective reflection is the so-
called lessons learned method. Lessons learne d describe one way to externalise tacit
knowledge by sharing individual knowledge within a group and transforming it into
organisational knowledge (Nonaka, 1994). Also from practical view, pa rticularly the close-out phase of a project offers the
possibility to formally capture reflections with the aim of improving future project performance (Harvard Business School, 1997). Typical close-out activities include
assessment of practices that promoted or hindered project performance and the
development of possible process improvements for future projects. The lessons learned
documentation covers the detail description of concrete project problems and their
solutions, which can be used as examples for following projects (Harvard Business School, 1997). The description should incl ude failed approaches as well.
In conclusion, the closing phase of a projec t represents an opportun ity to identify and
obtain essential knowledge of project team members. This report emphasises on the
importance of lessons learned sessions for knowledge transfer w ithin and for further
projects, agreeing with Boddie’s ( 1987) view of this topic:

“The post-mortem experience is much like a losing football team watching a game
film. It is not comfortable, but if the team pays attention to its mistakes, it can
perform better the next time it plays” (ibid, p. 7).

Theoretical Framework
26 2.6.4 Mentoring and Social Networks
A mentoring programme is similar to Nona ka and Takeuchi’s (1995) model of the
socialisation mode, the apprentice learning. The goal of mentoring is the exchange of knowledge, so that th e protégé is better
socialized and prepared to ta ke on increasingly important du ties in the company (Ostroff
and Kozlwoski, 1993). Mentoring relationships have been associated with positive outcomes, including improved socialisation, re duced turnover intentions, and career
satisfaction (Dreher and Ash, 1990). Accordin g to Messmer (1998), the most important
qualifications for participation in a mentori ng programme are commitment to growth, the
ability to listen, trustworthiness and objec tivity. However, mentoring programmes must
encourage members to share their knowledge, which can be complicated when keeping
knowledge is regarded as a way to become irreplaceable. Sveiby (1997) argues that ment oring programmes are meaningful to mentors as well as
for the protégés as the main purpose of these programmes is to create social networks.

Social networks are used to create contacts as well on the outside as on the inside of the
organisation where the latter form can be identi fied as informal social networks. Katz
and Kahn (1978) argue that such informal social networks are mainly based on informal communication. Contrary to formal communi cation, it can be characterised by being
spontaneous, fast and even more informa tive (Katz and Kahn, 1978). There are several
researches which have proven that informal social networks are important for team
performance (e.g. Rosenthal, 2004). In a project-specific context informal social networks play an important role. For the
purpose of this report it is argued that re lationships between project members can
enhance or even impede knowledge sharin g and consequently influence project
performance. Generally, organisations should foster both, mentoring programmes and social networks,
as they facilitate formal and an informal knowledge transfer.

Theoretical Framework
27 2.6.5 Information Technology
Literature and organisational initiatives in knowledge mana gement have until now tended
to focus more on technology as complete know ledge management solutions (Edwards et
al., 2003). Scholars like Sveiby (1997), von Krogh et al. (1998), and Davenport and
Prusak (1998) have given gr eat attention to information technology. According to Hansen
et al. (1999), information technology has ma de it possible to handle knowledge in a less
resource demanding way, through codification a nd virtual storage. Organisations which
emphasise their knowledge management in itiatives on information technology are
adopting the codification stra tegy. During their research Ha nsen et al. (1999) found out
that firms engaged in knowledge management use both codificati on and personalisation
approaches, although each company focuses on one strategy and uses the other in a supporting role. Knowledge management technology is not a si ngle technology, but ra ther a broad range
of technologies that need to be adopted in an integrated pr ogramme (Davenport and
Völpel, 2001). Modern information technolog y has led to the diversity of knowledge
management over the past decade, including arti ficial intelligence, machine learning, or
data warehousing (Liu and Hsu, 2004). The most common type of knowledge
management programmes involves building repo sitories of codified (explicit) knowledge.
In the project-specific environment, a docum entation tool for codifying explicit project
knowledge are project files whic h cover project characteristics and summaries (Disterer,
2002). A systematic collection of project file s provide a source of knowledge and can be
accessed and used by the whole project team during and after the project.
A similar solution is the creation and impl ementation of so-called ‘yellow pages of
experts’ (Disterer, 2002). After the end of a project member can be identified and
contacted by using these pages. Building up ‘yellow pages’ follows the personalisation
strategy, which states that knowle dge is strongly att ached to individuals (Hansen et al.,
1999). Both databases can be published on a genera l platform, for instance, the intranet of
the organisation.

Theoretical Framework
28 The mentioned tools and their accessibil ity on a common platform are vital for
knowledge transfer, as it has been discovered that up to 50 per cent of project manager’s
time is spent on searching for informati on and experts (Edwar ds et al., 2003).
The development of technology is a crucia l factor for managing knowledge. However,
assigning technology as a central role in knowledge management “may lead to the
bureaucracy of knowledge” (Leseure and Brookes, 2004, p. 105). Many knowledge
management programmes have overemphasised the codification approach of converting
tacit knowledge into ex plicit. The obsession with measur ements and rigid routines is
based on the belief that knowle dge can be controlled like da ta (Michailova and Husted,
2002). The presently converging knowledge ma nagement perspective acknowledges that
technology is a necessary enabling function of knowledge management, but also
recognises that this phenomenon is driven ma inly by people-oriented factors within the
organisational environment. Knowledge management can be supported by technology
although technology solutions alone seem to have failed to be the primary answer to an
effective knowledge management.

2.7 Summary and Discussion
The literature sources and theories concerni ng the management of knowledge have grown
remarkably during the last years and the c ontribution of knowledge management is still
argued. It is a panacea and so a competitive advantage for or ganisations or the emperor’s
new clothes?

In the theoretical framework of this report, the contribu tion of knowledge management
for project performance was examined by anal ysing relevant theori es. During the first
sections, the report has dealt with several theories and model of knowledge management
in order to provide a background of the differe nt views and classifications of knowledge.
This background has been useful for the second part of the theoretical framework, where
concepts were narrowed down to discuss the process of knowledge creation and transfer
with the aim of answering th e first sub question namely “Which theoretical tools do
influence the processes of know ledge capture and transfer?”

Theoretical Framework
29 The literature review suggests that the ma jor contribution from knowledge management
concerns the effort to convert tacit knowle dge into explicit information. Consequently,
the main focus of knowledge management literature is on information technologies as the key management tool to cope with this intangible asset. However, the purpose of this report is to find a hybrid approach for knowledge
management at project-specific environments , taking into account technical as well as
human-specific aspects. Therefore, Nonaka and Takeuchi’s (1995) model was chosen as it deals with the
processes of how individuals create and tran sfer knowledge, using social interaction and
also information technologies. On e important aspect here is th at all areas of the model are
of equal importance for knowledge creation and transfer, e.g. Nonaka and Takeuchi
(1995) do not rank the modes differently. The selection of the tools derived from the anal ysed theories can also be questioned. The
tools were obtained to a large extent from Nonaka and Takeuchi’s (1995) model, being
aware that other scholars like Davenport and Prusak ( 1998) and von Krogh (1998) have
made similar notes about these tools. Howe ver, Nonaka and Takeuchi’s influence on
these other scholars can be debated. Other to ols were developed from the review of
project management literature. The presented tools cover most of the important aspects which foster knowledge transfer. However, it is important to mention that the
effectiveness of these tools depends to a large extent of the practical setting.
Considering these basic premises, the next chap ter presents the application part of this
report, a case study based on a high- speed train project of XXX.

Application: The Project XY
30 III. APPLICATION: THE PROJECT XY

In this chapter, the case study will be presented including relevant information about
XXX Spain, the business unit Transportation Syst ems and the studied project XY. After
that, the identified problem from the project management’s point of view will be stated.

XXX S.A., founded over 100 years ago in Spain, is headquartered in the Spanish capital
Madrid and employs more than 6,500 people (XXX, 2003). The studied case, the project XY, is a high-sp eed train project of the business unit YZ of
XXX S.A. in Spain and XXX AG in Germany. The business unit YZ exists since 1989 at
XXX AG and has become one of the leading international supplie rs in the railway
industry with sales of approximately up to 4,7 billion Euros and 17,700 employees
worldwide (104 employees in Spain) in the year 2003 (XXX, 2004). At XXX and
especially the business unit YZ, long-term engineering and manufacturing activities are
conventionally organised as projects. Currently there exist about ten important, so-called
A-category levelled projects worldwid e; one of them is the XY project.

3.1 The Case Study Project XY
The case study here is centred on XXX Trans portations System’s contract to design,
manufacture, and maintain high speed trains for the route Madrid-Barcelona, which is
operated by the Spanish state-owned ra ilway company RENFE. By achieving a
maximum speed of 350 kilometres per hour (kph), these trains will reduce the travel time
between Madrid and Barcelona with a distance of 625 km from 6 and a half hours to less
than 2 hours and 30 minutes (XXX, 2001). The following figure 7 shows the most importa nt technical and commercial facts of the
XY project.

Application: The Project XY
31

FACT SHEET OF XY

Costumer Renfe
Contract signed July 2001
Total order volume 705 million Euros
Price of trains 401 million Euros
Maintenance (14 years) 304 million Euros
Scope of delivery 16 trains (8 cars per train)
Date of completion 2005
Empty weight 425 tons
Acceleration, 0-320 kph 380 seconds
Braking distance 3,900 m (320 kph – 0)
Traction Power 8,800 kW
Top Speed 350 kph
Figure 7: Fact Sheet of XY
Source: XXX (2002, adapted)

The XY project team consists currently of 18 employees at XXX Spain and about 45
employees at XXX Germany, situated at differe nt project offices in Spain and Germany.
There are Spanish as well German employees at the different locations. There exist fourteen so-called areas of expertise, fo r instance, the areas of construction, quality
management, regional management for the pr oject office in Spain, controlling and risk
management. These areas depend directly of the project management which consists of two persons,
the technical (also general) di rector and the commercial direct or. The project has finished
the purchase and engineering (planning) phase and is currently manufacturing the trains
which will be delivered ongoing by the end of the year 2005. Fundamentally, the project XY is a part of the greater updating of Spain’s railway
industry (please refer Appendix I) and ther efore an important milestone for XXX to
improve its market position in Spain.

Application: The Project XY
32 3.2 Knowledge Manage ment Project at XY
The knowledge gained through this project will be a key factor of success for further
high-speed train projects of XXX. Having this idea in mind, the project XY aims to
implement a knowledge management programme in the near future. Up to now there is
no formalisation of knowledge management pr actices in the project, but informal
knowledge sharing is currently used to some degree. There is a need to increase the
inherent knowledge sharing and transfer to improve pr esent and further project
performances. The aim of the project mana gement should be to manage the project-
specific knowledge across time and in the existing multi-cultural setting. XXX, once noted for its bureaucratic and hierar chical approach to business, has adopted
in Germany a bottom-up approach to know ledge management, which has transformed
effectively the company over the last years. Between 60 and 80 per cent of the added
value that XXX generates is linked directly to knowledge (Davenport and Völpel, 2001).
But despite of the successful implemen tation of knowledge management tools and
processes at XXX Germany, these efforts are still in a nascent ph ase in XXX in Spain
(Torun, 2004). Only the employees of the business units Mobile Communications and XXX Business Services experienced some aspects of the knowledge management
programme since both business units of the parent company have implemented global
knowledge management projects. There is a need to implement knowledge management
initiatives at Transportation Systems, as the num ber of projects is in creasing, especially at
the high-speed sector. The urgency for an implementation of an ef fective knowledge management programme at
XY and further projects is increased as Sp ain’s national railway RENFE has ordered ten
more high-speed train of the type XY for its network. The project XY 2, with a total order
amount of 430 million Euros (240 million Euro s for trains; 190 million Euros for the
maintenance period of 14 years), will proba bly commence at the end of the year 2005.

Application: The Project XY
33 In conclusion, this section can be seen as a provision of the background for the studied
project XY at XXX, essential to appreciate the empirical fi ndings and analysis in the
following chapter.

Empirical Findings and Analysis
34 IV. EMPIRICAL FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS

This chapter encompasses the empirical findings of the st udied project which will be
discussed and analysed following the structur e of the theoretical framework. To give
firstly an overview, current knowledge m anagement practices at the project are
presented. The purpose of the analysis is to examine the pr esent knowledge transfer and
thus answer the second sub question: “Which activities does the project team accomplish
to capture and transfer knowledge ?” At the end of this chapte r, tools will be examined by
analysing the existence of N onaka and Takeuchi’s (1995) four modes model within the
project.

Following the case-study approach as s uggested by Yin (1994), interviews were
completed with some project members of the XY project. The aim wa s to gain attitudes
and experiences of subjects invol ved in the studied project.
The data was collected through semi-str uctured interviews focusing on knowledge
management problems and practices. Such interviews are an approach to qualitative research and appropriate when conducting discussions where emphasis is put on
exploring the ‘why’ of the issues (Saunders et al., 2003). For further information about
the research methods applied at this report and the interview guide please refer to
Appendix II and III respectively. In order to present clearly th e findings from the research interviews and their analysis,
this section will follow the structur e of the theoretical framework.

Empirical Findings and Analysis
35 4.1 Current Knowledge Management Practices
The aim of this section is to create an unde rstanding about the attitudes regarding existing
knowledge management practices.

¾ Findings
At the XY project, knowledge management in itiatives are more informal with only few
indications of formal practices. According to one of the inte rviewees, the XY project does not sufficiently use knowledge
gained from other projects and vice ve rsa. For instance, to find out about the usage of
existent technologies and processes, most of the interviewees talk to other members of
the project team or members of the organisa tion but no formal structure is given which
offers access to existing knowledge. Seeking as sistance for problem solving is common at
the project, although the manage ment does not actively suppor t it. All respondents stated
that they shared their knowledge with so meone, most often, ironically with the
management. The sharing of the solutions wa s primarily a voluntary activity and was not
rewarded formally. Most interviewees agreed that due to the constant time pressures at the project, there is no occasion to search for already existing solutions in former or
parallel projects. As one interviewee stated:

“Sometimes we solve a problem, being aware that the solution must exist
somewhere at the organisation. But who has enough time to search for it?”

The consequence of this behaviour is the c onstant reinvention of solutions. However,
some of the interviewees gave examples of knowledge sharing activities. One example is
that project managers within the XY project ar e in contact with thei r line managers who
have knowledge about past or other current projects.

Empirical Findings and Analysis
36 An existing practice to secure knowledge of former projects is, according to all
interviewees, to recru it ex-project team members. At the XY project, existing knowledge
has been used by recruiting employees with former high-speed trai n project experience.
The project management and the members of the different areas of expertise have
participated at former proj ects of the business unit Trans portation Systems and there are
few cases where experts were ‘head-hunted’ fr om other companies in the high-speed train
sector. Nevertheless, the majority of the project team, which fu lfils more operational
tasks, was recruited especially for the proj ect and had no former project experience.

¾ Analysis
Analysing the results of the interviews it can be stated that there is generally a positive
attitude towards existing knowledge. However, few project members appear to take the
time to locate existing knowledge in database s. Instead, they create new solutions, even
though the same might exist somewhere in the organisation. This corresponds to attitudes reflected in the section about information technology and
databases, where the interviewees stated th at it is difficult to find information in a
structured and easily accessible way. In a ddition, learning about existing knowledge is
tightly connected with networks, since that is the most common way of sharing knowledge at the project. It appears as if the project XY unintenti onally concentrates on the personalisation
strategy. This is supported by the fact that each employee will constantly enter into new
social systems, as new teams are set up for following projects. By following this path,
knowledge is shared and create d through the interpersonal re lations when establishing
and recombining new teams. This techni que corresponds with Argote and Ingram’s
(2000) ideas about how to transf er and use exis ting knowledge.

Empirical Findings and Analysis
37 4.2 Organisational Structures
This part focuses on earlier mentioned organi sational structures, su ch as organisational
culture and reward systems.

4.2.1 Organisational Culture

¾ Findings
When building up the project t eam, one of the focal points was on creating a diverse team
with members who possess knowledge in differe nt key areas. According to one of the
interviewees:
“A differentiated team has value for the su ccess of the project, since people with
diverse experience, personalities and cultures will force other members to look at
things in different ways.”

Contrary, many interviewees confirmed that sharing knowledge in a formal way does not
exist. Knowledge sharing is de pendent mainly on informal social structures and informal
communication. A lack of social structures can hinder knowl edge sharing, particularly
taken into account that the ma jority of the project team had no former experience with
projects and had to first establish informal social networks within the organisation. One
interviewee stated that team members were reluctant to make and talk about their
mistakes, as they were afraid being confr onted with the negative consequences. There
were also statements that relate d to national culture aspects:

“In Spain, information and knowledge is rel ated to power, and the general belief is
that the more information and knowledge you share, the less powerful you are.”

One interviewee, an expatriate who works for XXX Germany, confirmed this statement.
He explained that at XXX Germany people are more infl uenced by the XXX corporate
principles.

Empirical Findings and Analysis
38 There management highlights more the importance of these principles, for instance, the
empowerment of employees as a basis of th e organisational culture . At Spain, employees
seem to accept these principles, but in business practice, few act according to them. An interviewee, who was hire d locally, affirms that there is a lack of knowledge flow
between the German project office and the one in Madrid. During the starting phase of
the project, time and budget pressures we re lower. But due to purchasing and
manufacturing problems, pressures increased during the last two years. One important
consequence has been the reduction of the trav el budget, so that many project members of
Germany and Spain did not have the opportunity to meet persona lly in order to establish a
social network across national frontiers.

¾ Analysis
All interviewees highlighted important aspects: the project team diversity, the importance
of a social network for knowledge sharing and the influence of national culture on
organisational culture. The diversity of the project team can foster knowledge sharing activitie s. Diversity refers
here to the different experiences, ages, gende r, expertise, persona lity, culture of the
project team (Adler, 1991). For a project to be accomplished by a diverse team, it requires that some team members work in areas outside of their expe rtise and experience.
This situation presents uni que communication challenges.
The effective management of diversity will be crucial for knowledge management,
particularly where knowledge shar ing is a high priority. Furthe rmore, it is necessary to
consider the importance of social networks w ithin the project (detail discussion at section
4.4). The reason is that through social netw orks, members share their own knowledge as
well as receive help from ot hers to solve problems.

Empirical Findings and Analysis
39 Finally, organisational culture pl ays a key role by fostering knowledge sharing. It is a set
of value, feelings, attitudes and expectations which provide meaning and order stability to
members’ lives and influence their behaviour (Cartwright and Coope r, 1995). As clarified
in the beginning of this report, the focus is on organisational cu lture, assuming that
German and Spanish employees accept the same organisational princi ples. In practice,
however, the national cultures s eem to influence organisationa l culture to a wide extent.
This observation is in accordance with theo ry. For instance, Geert Hofstede (1980)
argued organisation’s culture is nested with in a national culture, the latter influencing
human resource practices and organisational behaviour. Hence, the national cultures of
the diverse XY project team seem to infl uence knowledge management and induce to
different attitudes towards knowledge sharin g. Employees influenced by the Spanish
culture, seem to hold onto knowledge due to ma intain a powerful status or job security.
Von Krogh (1998) argues that this is a common reason why people capture their
knowledge. In this context, if power has to be assured, information flows must be limited.
This reinforces one way (either top-dow n or bottom-up) communication channels
between superiors and subordinates. Open a nd widely spread communication is hampered
(Ford and Chan, 2003). However, knowledge tr ansfer requires the wi llingness of a group
or individual to work with others and sh are knowledge to their mutual benefit.

There is evidence that the development of a strong organisational culture emphasises
knowledge sharing and reduces the influences of national cultures (Ford and Chan, 2003).
Consequently, one important que stion is if and to what extent the employees of XXX
Spain accept and live the organisational cultur e of XXX (Germany) and its values. For
this report this issue cannot be analysed in detail, only highlight some essential aspects
for knowledge sharing.

Empirical Findings and Analysis
40 4.2.2 Reward Systems

¾ Findings
Knowledge management and learning issues are not included to a wide extent in XY
project performance measurements. One interviewee affirms:
“It is challenging enough to deliver on time and within budget” .

Interviewees often highlighted that there are little incentives for individual bases in the
project to contribute to the development of a collective knowledge base across projects.
According to some comments, there is a lack of formal management for knowledge
sharing:
“People hold onto their knowledge, because of a lack of the formal structure and
management. If there was a formal stru cture, knowledge sharing might be
integrated as routine into our daily activities.”

The company’s appraisal process is only conc erned with the individua l’s ability to meet
specified objectives, and has little consid eration for knowledge cap turing or transferring
activities. One interviewee points out that a successful project is rewarding in itself.
There was only one respondent who confirmed th at he has an incentive-based objective
referring to knowledge sharing. This respondent works on a manual about a certain type
of controlling procedures, transforming theref ore his implicit knowledge to explicit. But
his objective is unintentionally; there is a need to make this information accessible for the
whole project team and the business unit, as in the future the projects should be controlled according to new accounting prin ciples. This knowledge procedure exists
already at XXX Germany, a lthough there are only versions in German and English.

Empirical Findings and Analysis
41 ¾ Analysis
The answers of the interview highlight the need of an appropriate reward structure being
a method to encourage employees to work to wards the project objec tives. This view is
based on the assumption that if the realised wo rk of is not awarded, it will be delayed or
done badly (Siemienieuch and Sinclair, 2004). People cannot be expected to share their
ideas and knowledge simply because it is the right thing to do (Leseure and Brookes, 2004). Moreover, the analysis of the findings indi cates that the management of the XY
project needs to take a more formal and active posture to knowledge sharing. Generally,
management support is a key for knowledge shar ing and with an active posture it will
become more prevalent within the project.
However, capturing and transferring knowledge is a strategic benefit and thus is
justifiably an overhead expense, but in this case it is a tactical cost, and the project is
expected to absorb it. Given the fact that project mangers are under demanding pressures
to deliver on time and within budget, it is no t surprising that formal and structured
knowledge transferring activities were ignored until now.

Empirical Findings and Analysis
42 4.3 Communication
This section is divided into three parts, the first one represents different ways of
communicating at the project, the second deals with mee tings and the third with
collective reflection sessions as so-called lessons learned.

¾ Findings: Communication
Common ways to communicate are mainly via e-mail, phone and through meetings. One
interviewee, who works often at the project office in Ge rmany, complained about the
high amount of e-mails at this project received by the superiors.

“Sometimes it is easier for my boss to wr ite an e-mail than to interrupt work for
talking to me. And he has a written pr ove if the demanded work is not done on
time.”

This type of behaviour was confirmed by several respondents. Nevertheless, most
interviewees agree that on horizontal level, i.e. between colleagues, there are more
informal ways of communicating such as talking during coffee br eaks, approaching a
person’s workplace, and asking spontaneous que stions. One of the interviewees affirmed:

“We (Spaniards) are not so good at documenting, but instead people talk to each
other and that is what is important.”

When asked how they go about finding solutions to problems, most of the interviewees
stated that they discuss ideas and solutions with the closes t colleague. One answer was:

“The competence I need is o ften sitting next to me, and I do not have to go very far
to get the information I require.”

Another interviewee claimed that when there is information that can be valuable to
someone else, he informs the person about it.

Empirical Findings and Analysis
43 ¾ Findings: Meetings
Meetings within the project are held cross-f unctionally and within e ach area of expertise.
The meetings on the level of ar eas of expertise are held re gularly with the purpose to
update important key figures about the stat us of all areas. O ccasionally, there are
meetings held by the project management wi th responsible managers of the areas of
expertise. These meetings can concern problems and risks, or provide a status report of
the project as a whole. One of the interviewees , a project manager of an area of expertise,
affirmed that structured and scheduled meetings are needed in a large project.
Another respondent highlighted the lack of meetings on project team level. These
meetings were only held during the beginning phase of the project, but due to time
pressure, they are not carried out anymore or on occasions only:
“I miss these general project meetings , because during these reunions all the
pieces in the puzzle were put in place, whic h made it possible to solve a task much
faster.”

Despite of this, some had the opinion that there are still numerous meetings and one
interviewee claimed:

“There is too much talk and too little action.”

¾ Findings: Lessons Learned
This method of communication is strongly related to knowledge transfer. When people
reflect on their actions, greater focus is placed on the knowledge gained through these
formal reflection sessions. Some interviewees mentioned internal and external project audits which take place twice a year. Their purpose is to get inputs from an external party, the audit team, concerning
what could be improved or done differently. Other evaluations are those done together
with subcontractors, where both parties have had to improve from the feedback given.

Empirical Findings and Analysis
44 Within the project, evaluations are made at different levels according to one interviewee.
Firstly, there are evaluations of the project as a whole, made by project management.
Secondly, there are evaluations conducted by and for each area of expertise. All these
evaluations are stored in minutes of mee ting documents which are saved on the project
server but can only be accessed by a certain group of the project.
One of the interviewees also mentioned less ons learned sessions. He confirmed that he
has participated in lessons le arned meetings before and that it was very rewarding. For
the XY project he stated:
“Too little emphasis is put on expressing w hat has been done right or wrong.”

The analysis of failures is very valuable for knowledge transfer, but the project is lacking
of an open and constructive atmosphere to articulate and analyse errors. Employees
especially from middle-management, avoid admitting mistakes, as they are scared of negative effects, e.g. their replacement by another expert. This behaviour is understandable as at the beginning of the project there was a hi gh personnel rotation.

¾ Analysis: Communication
The analysis is based on the earlier me ntioned general communications methods,
meetings and lessons learned sessions. Davenport and Prusak (1998) ar gue that conversations ar e a key method to sharing
knowledge, whether in a formalised or informal way. From the interviews it can be stated
that oral communication is th e principal way to share knowle dge. The fact that it is the
strongest form of communicating within the project can possibly be reinforced by the
open-space offices, which are promoti ng communication. The tendency to oral
communication might also be a sign for a high-care environment at the project which
promotes interaction between people.

Empirical Findings and Analysis
45 There is evidence that many members do not rely on formal procedures, processes and
information technology systems to access knowledge, but on social interaction, principally on a horizontal communication level. On the other hand, the high amount of e-mails indicates an increasing distrust at the
project climate, mainly on a top-bottom level. Agreements or fulfilled tasks communicated during a conversation cannot be pr oved to external parties, for instance,
the superior. Therefore employees prefer send e-mails to have a written prove of their
work. This lack of trust can also be obser ved from the behaviour of middle-management.
Both behaviours conduct to reduced activ ities of effective knowledge sharing.
Moving away from a culture that would seek to apportion blame when things go wrong to
one which focuses on problem solving is more likely to build organisations and
individuals who are more will ing to share and apply knowledg e. Otherwise, teams will be
unable to fully use the knowledge of their memb ers and are risk averse in their outlook.
According to Davenport and Prusak (1998), foru ms with face-to-face contact are one of
the most effective ways of sharing knowledge . Within the project XY there are various
opportunities to share knowledge this way, for instance through meetings. A broad
spectrum of meetings is covered. However, general meetings where the whole project
team is informed about important proj ect issues do not ta ke place regularly.
Collective reflection sessions are for instance lessons-learned sessi ons. The project team
requested more of them as they were useful to discuss problems. Collective reflections
are one part of the externa lisation mode, where tacit knowle dge is made explicit (Nonaka
and Takeuchi, 1995). Interviewees complained that not enough time is spent on project
reviews and formulating lessons learned. For in stance, the time to write a lessons learned
note is considered to be unproductive. Due to the fact that even the project plan does not designate time and budget for knowledge manage ment, the result is that team members
do not regard securing experiences from lessons learned as being important.

Empirical Findings and Analysis
46 4.4 Mentoring Programmes and Social Networks
In this section, mentoring programmes and so cial networks within the XY are presented
and discussed.

¾ Findings
A number of interviewees expressed a key c oncern for the transfer of knowledge between
the different generations of employees. Some of the interviewees pointed out a formal
mentoring programme where new recruits ar e rotated between seve ral departments. A
certification process is used to vali date the end of the apprenticeship.
Most of the interviewees agr eed that mentors could help to introduce new employees to
people and thus get them to start creating networ ks, since it is commonly agreed that it is
difficult to be new in an organisation and that it takes time to build up a network, or as
one interviewee affirmed:

“It is a torture to be new and not knowing who you can talk to.”

There was a consistency in the answers rega rding the importance of social networks.
Both formal and informal networks are me ntioned, although the main focus has been
placed on the informal ones. All interviewees believed that informal networks are vital
for the knowledge sharing within XXX and the XY project. The longer you have worked
in an organisation, the larger your network will be. If there is a pr oblem that has to be
solved, all of the interviewees decided to talk to people before searching for information in databases or documents. According to one of the interviewees, it is important to accept
and encourage informal networks and show that they are important. Another interviewee,
an expatriate, stated:

“A lack of social networks can make it diffic ult to attain knowledge from others.
Fortunately, people here (in Spain) are very cooperative.”

Empirical Findings and Analysis
47 ¾ Analysis
According to von Krogh et al. (1998), ment oring programmes should help junior
members develop and grow at the same time, as senior members should be encouraged to
share their experiences. XXX uses a formal mentoring progra mme for new recruits. This
methodology stresses the importance of soci alisation and transmits personal and
embodied forms of knowledge. However, this programme is not project-specific and
carried out on organisational level. Most em ployees who are recruited for the project
although having passed this ment oring programme, had not gain ed any practical project
experience.

According to Sanchez and Heene (1997), ne tworks reveal a high amount of tacit
knowledge. Within the XY project, project memb ers have experienced the importance of
networks for locating existing knowledge. These informal networks are means for
knowledge transfer within the project. Howeve r, this personalised and informal way of
transferring knowledge may also hinder knowle dge transfer. For instance, it might be
time-consuming to find the expert (O’Dell and Grayson, 1998). Th e result is that
members invent solutions without examining if these already exis t elsewhere in the
organisation. Furthermore, although new recr uits are lacking of social networks, the culture at XXX
Spain seems to be focused on collaboration. But here it should be noted, that even though
a high level of collaboration can be found, si gnificant knowledge or information is seen
as important asset and therefor e shared only in the most n ear informal social network.

Empirical Findings and Analysis
48 4.5 Information Technology

¾ Findings
Like many other companies, XXX has an extens ive intranet, which might play a potential
role in codifying explicit knowledge and for its storing and distribution. But the intranet
is mainly used for the distribution of news, creating a information platform for employees
to be updated with the comp any’s activities and as such it does not contribute to
knowledge management at XXX and consequently for the project XY itself. Furthermore, the Spanish business unit Transportation Syst ems still does not ha ve an own section on
the intranet. In order to make working documents and mi nutes of meeting available to the whole
project, they are stored on a shared account or so-cal led ‘server’. The project team stores
some documents on the German server, althoug h not every project member has an access
to it. However, this account or server is consider ed to be user-unfriendly. One interviewee
affirmed:

“You can spend days trying to find something on the German account, it contains a
large amount of information and much of it is really obsolete. But that is not
surprising, who has time to actualise it?”

One interviewee mentioned that after the fi rst year of the project, the management
implemented a new documentation system called Fast-Train. Project members were trained at the different locatio ns on the using procedures of this system and analysis was
done to implement an additional server in Sp ain to fasten the accessibility. Nevertheless,
people were reluctant to invest time in savi ng documents on this system and questioned
its efficiency. When the whole project team was trained to use the system, the technical
(overall) project management changed and th e new director stopped this initiative.

Empirical Findings and Analysis
49 ¾ Analysis
Even though the server is used extensively, there appears to be some reluctance towards
documenting knowledge gained. Th e reasons given vary but it seems like most of the
interviewees mention th e lack of time. In addition, there are few incentives to document
knowledge. Here a connection can also be drawn to von Kr ogh’s (1998) low-care
environment where knowledge is not shared unl ess the benefits are obvious. For instance,
the project team does not unders tand why documents should be saved. Initiatives, such as
the documentation programme Fast-Train, are vi ewed as an additional workload. In align
with O’Dell and Grayson (1998), it is essentia l to define and communicate the purpose of
an information technology system before its implementation.
Generally, knowledge management activities of the project XY are concentrated on a
personalisation strategy focusing on transm itting knowledge between individuals. This
way of creating and sharing knowledge may be encouraged by, for example, social
networks, mentoring programmes and creati ng space for dialogue in open office floors.
Communication is created by applying these methods and according to Hansen et al.
(1999) face-to-face contact is considered to have crucial importance in relation to the
transfer and creation of knowledge. However, even though management encour ages a personalisa tion strategy through
emphasising the importance of networks, it is also requested to focus stronger on
information technology as a support tool.

Empirical Findings and Analysis
50 4.6 Analysis of the Four Modes
The tools corresponding with the four mode s will be analysed to identify how these
modes are represented within th e project. Some tools may be discussed more than once,
but in different contexts. Even though there appear to be elements of socialisation in the project in form of
mentoring, this method is also challenging. According to Polanyi (1962), knowledge is
highly personal as it sticks to an individual. Another concern is that even a mentoring
programme is in place, the transfer of tacit knowledge ma y be difficult to determine.
Furthermore, since the transfer of tacit knowledge cannot be visualised it also becomes
problematic to decide how to measure and c ontrol it from a manager’s point of view.
Tuomi (1999) goes even further, stating that knowledge cannot be managed. The focus on
socialisation within the XY project does not a ppear to be as strong as the focus on
externalisation, i.e. where tacit knowledge is made explicit. The tool derived from externalisation is communication. Seen from Nonaka and
Takeuchi’s (1995) view the way the projec t members communicate could indicate that
there is a strong focus on extern alisation within the XY project . This focus is reinforced
by the extensive use of informal networks and meetings, since both provide the
opportunity to share experiences. However, s een from Polanyi’s (1962) point of view, it
is difficult to express and fo rmulate tacit knowledge, therefore it can also be stated that
realising the externalisati on mode might be challenging.
The interviews also highlighted that inform ation technology is not seen as a completely
well functioning tool. Therefor e the project team might be forced to emphasis on a more
personalised way of sharing knowledge, which could explain the strong focus on
externalisation at the project.

Empirical Findings and Analysis
51 In the combination mode, new explicit knowledge is mixed with existing explicit
knowledge. The tools associated here are co mmunication, information technology and
databases. It can be argued, however, that th e documenting is often seen as being the end
in itself. Consequently, storin g knowledge is more common than retrieving it from the
server. Although information technology and databa ses are to some extent available at the
project, oral communication is the foremo st common way of tr ansferring knowledge.
The fourth mode, internalisation , focuses on making explicit knowledge tacit. The tools
derived from this mode are information techno logy and oral stories, which form part of
the communication tool. In this mode, explicit knowledge that can be found, for example,
in databases can be used to internalise an individual’s know ledge. As mentioned earlier,
the retrieval of documentation is rare, which mean s that this type of internalisation is not
very common either, in the sense of few people looking for documented knowledge that
they can use and internalise. Instead, oral stories are a more common way to transfer
knowledge, considering that personal inte raction is emphasised in the project.

Empirical Findings and Analysis
52 4.7 Summary and Discussion of Analysis
As mentioned in the beginning of this chapter, the aim of the analysis was to answer the
second sub question “Which activities does the projec t team accomplish to capture and
transfer knowledge?”

The general impression is that the knowledge tr ansfer can be improved within the project.
All described tools of the theore tical part are more or less ap parent within the XY project.
The most noticeable tools are communication and social networks and to some degree
mentoring programmes. Unintentionally it seems as the project follows the personalisation strategy by focusing on thes e tools. The least apparent tools are
information technology, databases and collective reflec tions lessons in form of lessons
learned. The information technology and databa ses exist to some extent, but generally
due to lack of time and reluctance, th ey are not used up to full potential.
Lessons learned does not exist in a formal structure, which might be an important
hindrance for knowledge sharing within the pr oject and the transfer to other projects.
In conclusion, the requisites of the four modes exist at the XY project, even though there
seems to be a stronger emphasis on the mode s that foster socialisation processes.
However, the mere existence of the tools and methods are not sufficient to conclude that
the four modes are used in an effective way.

Recommendations
53 V. RECOMMENDATIONS

In this chapter, the main question “How can the capture and transfer of knowledge at
projects be improved to enhance project performance?” will be answered by giving
recommendations to the XY project management.

The purpose of this section is to summarise the findings from the viewpoint of managers
concerned with improving the effectivene ss of project performance through knowledge
management. While there are clearly important benefits to be gained from knowledge
management initiatives, on the other hand ther e exist also challenges when approaching
knowledge management from a project management perspective. In th is context, several
recommendations will be made in the followi ng section to the XY project management.
The aim is to enhance the project performance by implementing specific knowledge management initiatives.

5.1 Identification of Kn owledge Management Strategy
The main recommendation is that the XY proj ect must identify a knowledge management
strategy with a special focus on knowledge transfer.
Only a strategy formulation establishes an ove rarching goal to help the project team to
pull in the same direction with a shared vi sion. Therefore, on pr oject level, knowledge
sharing should be tied direc tly to a project strategy.
The two knowledge management strategies identified in section 2.4.1 are personalisation
and codification. The preferred strategy must be chosen, as there is no clear focus at the
moment. It appears that the management strives towards having a stronger focus on
information technology, while on the other hand the project members appear to focus
more on personal communication.

Recommendations
54 Since the personalisation focus is already in pl ace, and the project me mbers appear to be
comfortable with this way of working, the recommendation is to maintain this strategy as
the predominating and implementing inform ation technology as a support function.

5.2 Information Technology as Support Function
Information technology should be implemented as support function to the personalisation
strategy at the XY project. Creating “who knows what” or yellow pages coul d be the first activity. Yellow expert are
skills matrix with personal editing to ensure that the offered information stays current
(Disterer, 2002). Organising the directory in areas of expertise instead of names will lead to an easy navigation for spec ific knowledge. Such director y can provide an immediate
benefit to sceptical employees and managers at little cost, supplementing the usual,
informal approach (Siemienieuch and Sinclair, 2004). A further recommendation is the constantly use of project files. These files might include
data about, for instance, project structure, costumer, risks, volume and scope of the
project. Consequently these documents are important for the entire project team and
should be updated periodically. A general recommendation for Transportation Systems is the implementation of an own section on the intranet. This would represent a homogenous a nd easy accessible platform
of knowledge management activities. In conclusion, the information technology a pproach requires a mix of technology and
organisational processes.

5.3 The Importance of Project Structures
Project culture, team diversity and reward sy stems are areas identified for improvement
in order to enhance knowledge management efforts. The following section includes
recommendations referring to these tools.

Recommendations
55 5.3.1 Project Culture
There exist several steps to align knowledge sharing with the support of project culture.
To create a knowledge sharing culture, th e connection between sharing knowledge and
practical business goals, pr oblems and results should be made visible by the project
management. Furthermore, sharing knowledge should be linked to widely held core
values. Project management cannot expect pe ople share their ideas and knowledge just
because it is the right thing to do. Furthermore, human networks should be co nsidered as key vehicles for sharing
knowledge. To build a sharing culture, the pr oject has to enhance the already existing
networks by enabling them with tools and sufficient resources. For instance, time and
budget resource could be facilitated to organise teambuilding workshops between German and Spanish members of the project team. This activity would also foster the
creation of an open project cultu re and social networks. In this context, trust plays an
important role. Certain management practises can influence the level of trust in an
organisation. When decisions are made openl y and information is widely available and
accessible by employees, trust might increase. Fair treatment of employees and rewards that emphasise shared success are practises th at will increase the level of trust among
employees as well. On the contrary, unilatera l decision-making and a lack of information
will inhibit trust which lead s to poor cooperation, reduced communication and therefore
less activities of sh aring knowledge (Smith et al., 1995).
Finding first the knowledge shari ng networks that already ex ist and build up on them is
the right approach for knowledge management.
5.3.2 Team Diversity
The effective management of diversity will be crucial for knowledge management,
particularly where knowledge sharing is a s een as a high prior ity. Therefore the XY
project should focus more on its team divers ity to foster knowledge sharing across project
frontiers. An understanding of group processe s such as the phases forming, storming,
norming and performing can be useful for the pr oject management in order to analyse the
creation and development of culture w ithin the project team (Weber, 1982).

Recommendations
56 The above mentioned teambuilding workshops can also be implemented with the aim to
help project members understanding the di fferences between their cultures. Here
especially the influence of national culture on working attitudes and processes should be
identified. Recognising cultural differences in the project team, particularly differences
between German and Spanish cultures, is an important step to anticipating potential
threats as well as opportunities. Overall, diverse project teams help organi sation to share information, knowledge and
resources across boundaries, transmit and cr eate organisational culture, and provide
examples of best practice (Iless and Ha yers, 1997). The project management of XY
should make team diversity a source of strengths and not let it become a barrier to its team performance.
5.3.3 Reward Systems
As a final recommendation regarding project structures, the use of personal appraisal
procedures should also be taken into ac count to evaluate pe rformance on knowledge
management (Simienieuch and Sinclair, 2004). Performance appraisals within a project
team can have a positive influence on teamwork as well as on the achievement of goals.
On a project level, two types of incentives have to be distinguis hed: individual and
collective. The first addresses to individua l team members direc tly, though involving the
disadvantage of a difficult evaluation of indi viduals’ performance within a collective task
accomplishment (Hoegl and Gemuneden, 2001). For instance, in order to encourage
mentoring behaviour, bonuses for mentoring ac tivities can be included in the individual
reward system. Collective incentives, such as team celebrations, are likely to foster the
quality of the collaborative process in teams as team performance as a whole is honoured
(Hoegl and Gemuneden, 2001). Furthermore, the rewards do not necessarily have to be
financial as, for example, rec ognising the contribution in publi c can also be an alternative
reward method.

Recommendations
57 5.4 Communication
Regarding the aspect of communication, two improvements are recommended.
Firstly, meetings on a general project team le vel should take place re gularly to foster an
open and constructive communication atmosphe re at the project. This would also
promote trust, one aspect which is reducing mainly between top-bottom relationships, and
enhance knowledge sh aring activities.
Second, it should be taken into account to implement less ons learned sessions. These
sessions offer an opportunity for the projec t members to reflect upon their work, what
they have learned and what can be improved in the future.
According to the Project Management Ins titute (2000) the cause of variances, the
reasoning behind corrective actions, and othe r types of lessons learned should be
documented so that they become part of th e historical database for both the current
project and other projects of the performing organisation. Qu estions which can initiate
this process are presented in the following figure 8.

Key Questions for Lessons Learned
¾ How did the project work during the different project phases?
¾ Where did the project team perform well?
¾ Where were particular obstacles during th e project and how did the project team
manage these?
¾ How was the communication between project members and did this influence the
work progress?
¾ Has the key learning be recorded in project files?

Figure 8: Key Questions for Lessons Learned Session
Source: Harvard Business School (1997, p. 35, adapted)

These questions can be asked at regular st atus and review meetings through the entire
project life to support instantaneous learning. For instance, lessons learned sessions can
take place when a milestone is reached or upon project completion. When producing
lessons learned at the end of the project, th e session might be influenced mainly by the
most recent event or the event which has caused the most difficulties.

Recommendations
58 Furthermore, tacit knowledge of individuals can be made exp licit initially in the form of
project review reports. When these documen ts of lessons learned sessions are of
sufficient interest, they may be put into pr actice documents or manuals. These may then
be made available through an organisati onal-wide database to all XXX employees.
Copies of these documents could be delive red on request to other project teams. The
Project Management Institute (2000) affirms that these sessions are the basis for knowledge management, therefore this approach is strongly recommended for the XY project as one way to enhance performan ce by sharing, documenting and transferring
knowledge.
5.5 Summary of Recommendations
In summary, the following recommendations when implementing knowledge management at the XY project should be considered. First, the project has to pursue formally a personalisation strategy, giving information
technology a support function. Within this, ex isting documentation procedures could be
improved, a directory of areas of expertise co uld be created and project files should be
implemented and used. Moreover, it is recommended to management to link knowledge management initiatives to project goals, communicate them to the w hole team and afterwards incorporating them
into individual and collective reward system s to demonstrate their importance. An open,
constructive and trustful proj ect culture should be fostered, giving employees the
opportunity to share knowledge and ideas. Dive rse backgrounds and cultures have to be
considered as strength of the project team. By emphasising on lessons learned sessions, ev aluation is becoming a conscious process.
These sessions allow the project team to learn from mistakes and to articulate, document and clarify what has been lear ned. Here the key challenge is to capture and store all the
lessons learned in this project so that they can be transferred to and retrieved from further
high-speed project teams.

Conclusions and Further Research
59 VI. CONCLUSIONS AND FURTHER RESEARCH

The purpose of this report has been to define how knowledge management initiatives
within a project can be enhanced. Therefor e suitable tools and tech niques of effective
knowledge management from relevant theories were being discussed and
recommendations were given to the studied project . At this section, conclusions on a
more general level will be drawn to answer the main research question of this report.

There is a congruent view by many scholars (Davenport and Prusak, 1998; Tuomi, 1999;
von Krogh et al., 1998) that knowledge manageme nt is of central importance to the
development of sustainable competitive adva ntage in organisations. However, effective
deployment of knowledge management is a di fficult task and many organisations tried
and failed with its implementa tion. On the other hand, ther e is a strong increase of
projects at organisations, because they are accepted to be the most learning intensive
organisational forms (Disterer, 2002). Bu t most companies apply a unique project
strategy. Consequently there are no economic learning curves derived from repeated
project performance. This leads to wasted ‘re-inventing the wheel’ activities, and
impaired project performance (Leseure and Brookes, 2004). In the early stage of this report, the hypot hesis that project management and knowledge
management could be conflicting paradigms wa s formulated. This hypothesis is explicitly
supported by the project knowledge management literature. The focus on short-term performance and the organisational isolation of the project could be interpreted as
conflicting with long-term know ledge management goals of the organisation in which
projects are organised. However, during the re search interviews it became apparent that
there is a strong connection between good management practices and the evidence that
project teams exhibited good pr actices for managing knowledge . If knowledge gained in
a project is formally captured and transferred, it can significantly improve current as well
future project management performances.

Conclusions and Further Research
60 Each project has different plans, problems , and successes which all offer an opportunity
to learn. One of the lessons le arned from the case study is that projects frequently find out
what they need to know too la te. As the studied project is already in the manufacturing
phase, there has been a particular emphasis on the closing phase of th e project. This stage
is one of the most delicate areas to manage successfully, and within this process attention needs to be given to the evaluati on of the project. It is often an area that is ignored by all
members, as participants and organisations ma y not particularly like to spend time on it,
especially if there are other projects to start immediately. Reflexive sessions maintained
by project team members, c onducted throughout a project life -cycle, may be useful for
transferring vital knowledge af ter the project closing. Here the knowledge management
process also needs to be supported with an appropriate culture which allows team
members to admit mistakes and openly discuss solutions to problems. Within this report the emphasis was on the pr ocesses of knowledge capture and transfer.
But more recently, management literature and organisations show a growing interest in the knowledge processes that underline innovation. Therefore, further research is needed
to develop particular knowledge management programmes for innovation project. These
initiatives should focus mainly on activ ities which foster knowledge creation.

The main conclusion of this report is th at projects should focus on capturing and
transferring knowledge, because increasing knowledge is a ssociated with increasing
project performance. Furthermore, modern project management should aim at continuous
improvement with every project (Ayas, 1996). The access to accumulated knowledge from projects completed over years might be a competitive advantage which is difficult to imitate (Dierickx and Cool, 1989). Thus, project management and knowledge management can only go hand in hand.

Bibliography
61 VII. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adler, N.J. (1991) International Dimensions of Organizational Behaviour. Boston: Kent
Publishers.

Alavi, M. and Leidner, D.E. (2001) Knowledge Management and Knowledge
Management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MISQ Review, Vol.
25, No. 1, pp. 107-136.

Alderman, N., Ivory, C.J., Vaughan, R., Thwa ites, A. and McLoughlin, I.P. (2001)
Knowledge management for project integratio n: case studies of capital investment
programmes. Paper for the Conference “Manag ing Knowledge: Conversations and
Critiques”, University of Leicester, 10-11 April 2001.

Argote, L. and Ingram, P. (2000 ) Knowledge Transfer: A Basis for Competitive
Advantage in Firms. Organisational Behaviour and Huma n Decision Process, Vol. 82,
No. 1, pp. 150-169. Ayas, K. (1996) Professional Project Management: A Shift toward Learning and a
Knowledge Creating Structure. International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 14,
No. 3, pp. 131-136. Baker, B.N., Murphy, D.C ., and Fisher, d. (1983) Factors Affecting Project Success. In
Cleland, D.I. and King, W.R. (Eds.), Pr oject Management Handbook, New York: Van
Nostrand Reinhold Company.
Barrtezzaghi, E. Corso, M. and Verganti, R. (1997) Continous Improvement and Inter-
Project Learning in New Product Development. International Journal of Technology
Management, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 116-138. Bartlett, C.A. and Ghoshal, S. (1998) Beyond Strategic Planning to Organization
Learning: Lifeblood of the Individualized Corporation. Strategy and Leadership,
January/February, pp. 34-39. Black, D.H. and Synan, C.D. (1997) The Learning Organisation: The Sixth Discipline.
Management Accounting, Vol. 75, No. 1, pp. 70-72. Boddie, J. (1987) The Project Postmortem. Computerworld, Vol. 7, December, p. 7.
Boisot, M. (1998) Knowledge Assets: Securing Competit ive Advantage in the Information
Economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bibliography
62 Brown, J.S. and Duguid, P. (1991) Organizational Learning and Communities of
Practice: Towards a Unified View of Working, Learning and Organization. Organization
Science, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 40-57. Brown, A. and Starkey, K. (2000) Organization Identity and Le arning: A psychodynamic
Perspective. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 25, No. 1, p. 102-120.
Bryde, D.J. (2003) Modelling Project Management Performance. International Journal of
Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 229-254. Bukowitz, W.R. and Williams, R.L. (1999) The Knowledge Management Fieldbook.
Harlow: Pearson Education. Cartwright, S. and Cooper, C.L. (1995) Managing Mergers, Acquisitions and Strategic
Alliances: Integrating People and Cultures. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Chase, R. (1997) Knowledge Management Benchmarks. Journal of Knowledge
Management, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp.83-92. Cook, S. and Brown, J. (1999) Bridging Epistemologies: Th e Generative Dance between
Organizational Knowledge and Organizational Knowing. Organization Science, Vol. 10,
No. 4, pp. 381-400. Davenport, T.H., De Long, D.W. and Beers, M.C. (1998) Successful Knowledge
Management Projects. Sloan Management Review, Vol. 39, No. 2, pp. 43-57.

Davenport, T. and Prusak, L. (1998) Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage
what they know. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Davenport, T. and Völpel, S. (2001) The Rise of Knowledge towards Attention
Management. Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 212-221.
Dierickx, I. and Cool, K. (1989) Asset Stock Accumulation and Sustainability of
Competitive Advantage. Management Science, Vol. 35, No. 12, pp. 1504-1513.
DiMattia, S. and Oder, N. (1997) Knowledge Management: Hope, Hype or Harbinger?
Library Journal, Vol. 122, No. 15, pp. 33-36. Disterer, G. (2001) Individual and Social Barriers to Knowledge Transfer. In Sprague
(Ed.), Proceedings of 34
th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Los
Alamitos, pp. 1-7. Disterer, G. (2002) Management of Project Knowledge and Experiences. Journal of
Knowledge Management, Vol. 6, No. 5, pp. 512-520.

Bibliography
63 Dreher, G.F. and Ash, R.A. (1990) A Comparative Study of Mentoring among Men and
Women in Managerial, Professional, and Technical Positions. Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 75, pp. 539-546. Drucker, P.F. (1988) The Coming in the New Organization . Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 66, No. 1, p. 45. Drucker, P. (2001) The Next Society: a Survey of the Near Future. The Economist, Vol.
3, November, pp. 2-20. Earl, M. J. (1997) Knowledge as Strategy. In Prusak, L. (Ed.), Knowledge in
Organizations, Boston: Butterwort-Heinemann.
Edwards, J., Handzic, M., Carlsson, S. and Nissen, M. (2003) Knowledge Management
Research and Practice: Visions and Directions. Knowledge Management Research and
Practice, Vol. 1, No. 1, July, pp. 49-60. Ford, D.P and Chan, Y.E. (2003) Knowledge Sharing in a Multi -Cultural Setting: A Case
Study. Knowledge Management Resear ch and Practice, No. 1, pp. 11-27.
Goh, S. C. (2002) Managing Effective Knowledge Trans fer: An Integrative Framework
and Some Practice Implications. Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp.
23-30. Grant, R.M. (1991) The Resource-Based Theory of Competitive Advantage: Implications
for Strategy Formulation. California Management Review, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 114-135.

Grant, R.M. (1996) Toward a Knowledge-Based Theory of the Firm. Strategic
Management Journal, No. 17, pp. 109-122. Guthrie, J. (2000) Intellectual Capital Review : Measurement, Reporting and
Management. Journal of Intellectua l Capital 1 (1), pp. 27-41.
Handzic, M., Lazaro, O. and van Toorn, C. (2004) Enabling Knowledge Sharing: Culture
versus Technology. School of Information System s, Technology and Management,
University of New South Wales. Hansen, M., Nohria, N., Tierney, T. (1999) What’s Your Strategy for Managing
Knowledge? Harvard Business Review, March/April, pp. 106-122.

Harvard Business School (1997) Project Management Manual. Boston: Harvard
Business School Press. Havens, C. and Knapp, E. (1999) Easing into Knowledge Management. Strategy and
Leadership, March/April, pp. 4-99.

Bibliography
64 Hayek, F.A. (1945) The Use of Knowledge in Society . American Economic Review , Vol.
35, pp. 519-530. Hoegl, M. and Gemuneden, H.G. (2001) Teamwork Quality and the Success of
Innovative Projects: a Theoretica l Concept and Empirical Evidence. Organization
Science, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 435-449. Hofstede, G. (1980) Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-related
Values. Beverly-Hills: Sage Publications.
Hoogervorst, J., Van der Flier, H. and Koopman, P. (2004) Implicit Communication in
Organisations: The Impact of Culture, St ructure and Management Practices on
Employee Behaviour. Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 288-311.
Iles, P. and Hayers, P.K. (1997) Managing Diversity in Transnational Project Teams – A
Tentative Model and Case Study. Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp.
95-117. Katz, D., Kahn, R. L. (1978) The Social Psychology of Organization. New York: John
Wiley and Sons. Katzy, B., Evaristo, R. and Zigurs, I. (2000) Knowledge Management in Virtual Projects:
A Research Agenda. Proceedings of the 33
rd Hawaii International Conference on System
Sciences. Kotnour, T. (2000) Organizational Learning Practices in the Project Management
Environment. International Journal of Quality a nd Reliability Management, Vol. 17, No.
4, pp. 393-406. Leseure, M. and Brookes, N. (2004) Knowledge Management Benchmarks for Project
Management. Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 103-116.
Liu, D.R. and Hsu, C. (2004) Project-based Knowledge Maps: Combining Project
Mining and XML-enabled Topic Maps. Internet Research, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 254-266.
McDermott, R. (1999) Why Information Technology in spired but cannot deliver
Knowledge Management. California Management Review, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 103-117.

McDermott, R. and O’Dell, C. (2001 ) Overcoming Cultural Barriers to Sharing
Knowledge. Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 76-85.

Meredith, J.R. and Mantel, S.J. (1985) Project Management: A Management Approach.
New York: Wiley and Sons. Messmer, M. (1998) Mentoring: Building your Co mpany’s Intellectual Capital. Human
Resources Focus, Vol. 75, No. 9, pp. 11-12.

Bibliography
65 Michailova, S. and Husted, K. (2002) Managing the Dynamic Interfaces between Culture
and Knowledge: A research Agenda. Management, Politics and Philosophy (MPP)
Working Paper 11. Nicholas, J.M. (1989) Successful Project Manageme nt: A Force-Field Analysis . Journal
of Systems Management, Vol. 40, No. 1, pp. 24-30. Nonaka, I. (1991) The Knowledge-Creating Company. In Barlett, C.A. and Ghoshal, S.
(2000) Transnational Management: Text, Ca ses, and Readings in Cross-Border
Management, Reading 5-3, 3
rd Edition, Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Nonaka, I. (1994) A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation.
Organization Science, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 14-37.
Nonaka, I., and Takeuchi, H. (1995) The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese
Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
Nonaka, I., and Konno, N. (1998) The Concept of Ba: Building a Foundation for
Knowledge Creation. California Management Review, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp. 40-54.
Nonaka, I., Konno, N. and Toyama, R. (2000) SECI, Ba and Leadership: A Unified
Model of Dynamic Knowledge Creation. Long Range Planning, Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 5-34.
O’Dell, C. and Grayson, C.J. (1998) If Only We Knew What We Know Now: The Transfer
of Internal Knowledge and Best Practice. New York: Free Press.

Ostroff, C. and Kozlwoski, S.W. (1993) The Role of Mentori ng in the Information
Gathering Processes of Newcomers dur ing Early Organizational Socialization. Journal
of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 42, pp. 170-183. Pan, S. and Scarbrough, H. (1999) Knowledge Management in Practice: An explotary
Case Study. Technology Analysis and Strategi c Management, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp.359-374.
Penrose, E.T. (1959) The Theory of the Growth of the Firm . Oxford: Blackwell.
Pfeffer, J. and Sutton, R. (2000) The Knowledge-doing Gap: Ho w smart Companies turn
Knowledge into Action. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Polanyi, M. (1962) Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. London:
Routledge and Keegan.

Prahalad, C.K. and Hamel, G. (1990) The Core Competences of the Corporation.
Harvard Business Review, May-June, pp. 79-88. Project Management Institute (2000) A Guide to the Project Management Body of
Knowledge (PMBOK
® Guide). PA: Project Management Institute.

Bibliography
66
Ramabadron, R., Dean, J.W. and Evans, J.R. (1997) Benchmarking and Project
Management: A review and Organizational Model. Benchmarking for Quality
Management and Technology, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 47-58. Robson, C. (2002) Real World Research. (2nd edit), Oxford: Blackwell.
Rosenthal, E. (2004) Social Networks and Team Performance. Team Performance
Management, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 288-294.

Sanchez, R. and Heene, A. (1997) Strategic Learning and Knowledge Management.
Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2003) Research Methods for Business
Students. (3
rd edit.), Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
Shankar, R., Singh, M.D, Gupta, A. and Narain, R. (2003) Strategic Planning for
Knowledge Management Implemen tation in Engineering Firms. Work Study, Vol. 52,
No. 4, pp. 190-200. XXX (2001) High-speed Train XY – for the Spanish National Railways. Technical
Report, XXX AG, Erlangen. XXX (2002) The World’s Fastest Series-Built Train. Internet Article for
channel.XXX.com, Transportation Systems, XXX AG, Erlangen.
XXX (2003) World Report – Project ICE 350. Internal Report, Transportation Systems,
XXX AG, Erlangen. XXX (2004) XXX Transportation Systems – Innovat ive Single Source Provider and
System Integrator to the Railway Industry. TS Profil 0311, Press Office Transportation
Systems, XXX AG, Munich. Simienieuch, C.E. and Sinclair, M.A. (2004) A Framework for Organisational Readiness
for Knowledge Management. International Journal of Operations and Production
Management, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 79-98. Smith, K.G. Carroll, S.J. and Ashford, J.A. (1995) Intra- and Inter-organizational
Cooperation. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 38, No. 1, p. 7-23.
Snowden, D. (2003 ) Innovation as an Objective of Knowledge Management. Part I: The
landscape of management. Knowledge Management Resear ch and Practice, No. 1, Vol.
2, pp. 113-119. Sveiby, K.E. (1997) The New Organisational Wealth. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler
Publishers.

Bibliography
67
Szulanksi, G. (1996) Exploring Internal Stickiness: Impe diments to the Transfer of Best
Practice inside the Firm. Academy of Management Journal, Special Issue: Best Papers
Proceedings, pp. 437-446. The Global Railway (2004) High-Speed Trains for Spain. The Global Railway
Pressbureau, Internet: www.thegl obalrailway.com (visited 07.08.2004).
Tiwana, A. (1999) The Knowledge Management Toolki t: Practical Techniques for
Building a Knowledge Management System. Prentice Hall PTR.
Torun, F. (2004) Knowledge Management Practices at XXX Spain – from a Culture Free
and Culture Specific Perspective. Report for the MBA Unit of Comparative Business
Management, East London Business School. Tukel, O.I. and Rom, W.O. (2001) An Empirical Investigation of Project Evaluation
Criteria. International Journal of Operations a nd Production Management, Vol. 21, No. 3,
pp. 400-416. Tuomi, I. (1999) Corporate Knowledge: Theory and Practice of Intelligent
Organizations. , Helsinki: Metaxis.
Von Hippel, E. (1994) Sticky Information and the Locus of Problem Solving:
Implications for Innovation. Management Science, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 429-439.
Von Krogh, G. and Roos, J. (1996) Managing Knowledge. London: Sage.

Von Krogh, G. (1998) Care in Knowledge Creation. California Management Review,
Vol. 40, No. 3, pp. 133-153.
Von Krogh, G., Roos, J., and Kleine, D. (1998) Knowing in Firms. Understanding,
Managing and Measuring Knowledge. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Weber, R.C. (1982) The Group: A Cycle fr om Birth to Death. In Jacobs (Ed.), National
Teaching Laboratories Institute Readi ng Book for Human Relations Training.
Weiser, M. and Morrison, J. (1998) Project Memory: Information Management for
Project Teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 149-
166. Yin, R.K. (1994) Case Study Research: Design and Methods. ( 2nd edit), Beverly Hills:
Sage Corporation. Zack, M.H. (1999) Managing Codified Knowledge. Sloan Management Review, Vol. 4,
No. 4, pp. 45-58.

Appendix I: Spain’s Infrastructure Plan of Transportation
68 Appendix I:

Spain’s Infrastructure Pl an of Transportation

Ministry of Communications (Minister of Infrastructure/Minister of Railways)
Infrastructure Plan of Transportation 2000-2007 (PIT) Activities at the high-speed railways Status: 2004-01-16
In function In construction Projects Open study Study en process Study of plan for Galicia (N orthwestern area of Spain)

Appendix II: Methodology
69 Appendix II: Methodology

The aim of this appendix is to present the research approach and method of this report.
There is detailed discussion of the primar y research and the applied interview method.

¾ Research method
The main difference between a qualitative and qu antitative research approach is the way
how it is carried out (Yin, 1994). In a quantitative method, the researcher transforms the data into numbers and quantities to compare them on a statistical base, while in the qualitative method, the researcher
interprets the information (Sa unders et al., 2003). Since the obj ective of this report is to
create an understanding for how knowledge is transferred within and between projects
and to discover areas of improvement, the qualitative method was chosen. However,
other different approaches to this topic are possible. But due to the complexity of the
research topic and the difficulty to find em pirical evidence, the qualitative method has
been applied at this report.

¾ Data Collection
In research there is a distin ction between primary and seco ndary data. For this report,
secondary sources have been us eful to create an understanding of the subject and to build
the theoretical framework. Examples of secondary data used for this report are books, academic journals, research agendas, a nd also company-specific information like
brochures, minutes of meeting and documenta tion on the intranet as well Internet. The
main disadvantage of secondary data is that the information was collected for a specific
purpose with different questions and objectives (Saunders et al., 2003) . Due to this fact,
primary data was collected to answer the res earch questions and to meet the objectives of
this report.

Appendix II: Methodology
70 Primary data provide more current and specific data for the research. For this report, a
total of eight interviews were conducted with employees of the projects. Interviewees
belong to various levels within the project, from upper ma nagement (project managers of
areas of expertise) to the general project team. Each interview took between 30 and 60
minutes. By asking open-ended questions it wa s anticipated to capture attitudes and
believes of the interviewee. This kind of information is difficult to gain in a structured questionnaire. Therefore, semi-structured ques tions were used, allowing the interviewees
to talk freely and to bring up issues with in the subject. This probably may have
contributed to the dispersed answers. Another reason for using this type of questions is
that it allows bringing up spontaneous quest ions, which creates a more discussion-like
interview. The interviewees were not audi o-taped due to the lack of ti me for transcription. This is
evidenced by Robson (2002) who states that for a recording of one hour approximately
ten hours are needed to transc ribe. Nevertheless, notes were taken to ensure accurate
recording of the responses.

Appendix III: Interview Guide
71 Appendix III: Interview Guide

This appendix contains the in terview guide used during the interviews. The interview
includes at the beginning some general que stion and follows with specific questions
concerning the issues knowledge sharing, information technology, and project review
sessions.

1) General Questions
¾ What is your position and task at XXX / Project XY?
¾ How much project work expe rience did you have before? If so, have you worked
in other projects at XXX?
¾ How would you describe the working e nvironment in your current project?
¾ Do you feel comfortable in the project group?
¾ Does the project team composition affect your work and function in the project?
¾ Do you have a mentor or a protégé in th e company? If yes, for what purpose?
¾ Do you meet people from other projects?

2) Knowledge Sharing
¾ Are there any efforts of the project mana gement to increase knowledge sharing?
¾ How is knowledge from previous projects shared?
¾ How do you share your knowledge in the project?
¾ Are you encouraged to search for knowle dge and to share your own knowledge?
¾ Are there any financial or non-financ ial rewards for sharing knowledge on
individual or group level?

3) Information Technology
¾ Does the project offer any information technology and databases?
¾ Do you use these information t echnology tools and databases?
¾ Do you access intranet to search for information?

4) Project Review Sessions
¾ Do you have meetings regularly?
¾ Do you have meeting where you discuss succes ses and failures, similar to lessons
learned sessions?