Page 129 -

112 Chapter 4

Box 4.3
An example: Xerox

It is, of course, not enough to create rich environments where people can share. Xerox
has lots of these: online Knowledge Universe with a catalog of best practices, chat rooms
for CoPs, a company Yellow Pages and a section of the public Web site, Knowledge Street,
devoted to promoting knowledge sharing. What are also required are good ideas, leader-
ship, and motivated people. A few years ago, Jack Whalen, a sociologist, spent some time
in a Xerox customer service call center outside Dallas studying how people used Eureka.
The trouble was, employees were not using it. Management decided workers needed an
incentive to change. To this end, they held a contest: workers could win points (convert-
ible into cash) each time they solved a customer problem, by whatever means. The winner
was an eight-year veteran named Carlos, who had more than 900 points. Carlos really
knew his stuff and everyone else knew this too. Carlos never used the software.
The runner-up however was a shock to everyone. Trish had been with the company
only a few months, had no previous experience with copiers, and didn ’ t even have the
software on her machine. Yet her 600 points doubled the score of the third-place winner.
Her secret: she sat right across from Carlos. She overheard him as he talked and she
persuaded him to show her the inner workings of copiers during lunch breaks. She asked
other colleagues for tips too. This story illustrates how knowledge gets shared. The point
is not the software, but how many people can sit next to Carlos? There is no single best
practice for sharing knowledge — both technology and subject matter experts are needed.
And sometimes storytelling is the best way to transfer knowledge. Most managers see
this as a waste of time, and concentrate on breaking up the coffee machine cliques.
However, companies should make opportunities for storytelling at informal get-togethers
that are loosely organized as an off-site meeting, and through videotapes and bragging
sessions.

knowledge/skills required, criticality, consequences of error, frequency, diffi culty,
interrelationships with other tasks and individuals, as well as how the task is perceived
by the person (routine, dreaded, or looked forward to).
Process tracing and protocol analysis are adapted from psychological techniques.
This method involves asking the subject matter expert to “ think aloud ” as he or
she solves a problem or undertakes a task. The information used, questions asked,
actions taken, alternatives considered, and decisions taken are the types of knowledge
that are acquired in such sessions (e.g., Svenson 1979 ; McGraw and Seale 1987 ;
Gammack and Young 1985 ). Simulations are especially effective for later stages
of knowledge acquisition, to validate, refi ne, and complete the knowledge capture
process. Tools may include software programs and “ props ” such as models, schematics,
and maps.