Page 311 -

294 Chapter 8

a knowledge warehouse should be strongly discouraged — the knowledge repository
should instead be visualized as a lens that is placed on top of the data and informa-
tion stores of the organization. The access and application of the content of a reposi-
tory should be as directly linked to professional practice and concrete actions as
possible.
The knowledge repository typically involves content management software tools
such as a LotusNotes platform and will be run as an intranet within the organization
with appropriate privacy and security measures in place. An example is described in
box 8.5.
Knowledge portals provide access to diverse enterprise content, communities,
expertise, and to internal and external services and information ( Collins 2003 ;

Box 8.5
An example: Price Waterhouse Coopers (PWC)

Price Waterhouse Coopers focused on sharing knowledge across what had been boundaries
following the merger of Price Waterhouse and Coopers & Lybrand. The chief knowledge
offi cer, Ellen Knapp, supported this effort by putting into place the KnowledgeCurve,
where employees can fi nd a repository of best practices, consulting methodologies, tax
and audit rules, news services, online training, directories of experts, and more, plus links
to specialized sites for various industries or skills. The site gets eighteen million hits a
month, mostly from workers downloading forms or checking news, but also from employ-
ees looking things up. Yet there is a feeling that it is underused. When looking for exper-
tise, most people still go down the hall.
In parallel, a British-based PWC consultant and his colleagues set up a network where
they could be more innovative. Over fi ve months they set up a Lotus Notes e-mail list
with no rules, no moderator, and no agenda other than what is set by the messages people
sent. Any employee was able to join. Kraken, as it came to be known, now has fi ve hundred
members and although it still has unoffi cial status, it has become the premier forum for
sharing. As an analogy, Kraken is to KnowledgeCurve what Carlos was to Eureka. On a
busy day, members may get fi fty Kraken messages but they are welcomed because they are
relevant and useful.
What are some of the reasons for this grassroots CoP success over corporate top-down
KM systems? It is demand-driven ( “ does anyone know … ” ); it gets at tacit knowledge; it
allows fuzzy questions rather than structured database queries; it is part of the everyday
routine; and it is full of opinions — points of view rather than dry facts. KnowledgeCurve
preserves explicit knowledge — Kraken enables the sharing of tacit knowledge. Kraken is
about learning; KnowledgeCurve is about teaching. You cannot have one without the
other.