author picture

by Christoph Schmaltz

This is a Headshift blog post by Christoph Schmaltz, written on December 11, 2008 in Corporate . It has (9) comments, the latest of which was on February 19, 2009. You can find more posts like this here.

Should knowledge retention be high on organizations' agenda?

Yesterday I stumbled across a post by Gordon Ross of Thoughtfarmer talking about a client where 50% of its staff is eligible to retire in the next eight years. What a massive brain drain! But we don't even have to go that far into the future. Times are tough now. The lists of laid-off employees (here and here) become longer and longer with every day. Even though these are two totally different scenarios, the fact that people and their knowledge are leaving an organization is the same.

Most companies have extensive data backup and disaster recovery plans in store. I think it speaks for itself that companies are still more concerned about machines breaking down than people leaving the company. Axing people now may help to cut costs and survive the economic downturn. However, if companies do not take action to retain the knowledge of people leaving, they will face increased transaction and training costs in the long run.

Obviously, the problem of knowledge retention is not entirely new. It has been on the agenda of knowledge managers for a long time. Early efforts included conducting interviews or documenting everything the employee deemed to be important shortly before leaving the organization. I personally have not read any statistics (or even seen an ROI ) on how fruitful these efforts actually are. However, I can imagine that the success is rather limited, since there are various problems with such formal approaches:

  • What is important to one person is not necessarily important to others.
  • Most knowledge cannot be documented but is inherently connected to people.
  • Questions and documents are inadequate to capture informal conversations or to make social connections visible.
  • Given our short time span, it is very likely to miss important pieces of information when interviews are conducted.
  • If an employee is laid off...
In short, relying only on formal approaches like the ones mentioned above will yield poor results when it comes to knowledge retention. I am not saying that these do not bring any benefit, but it should be clear that an organization needs to take a more holistic and especially timelier approach to knowledge retention. Holistic in the sense of being able to capture/transfer informal knowledge and timely meaning starting today and not when an employee is about to leave. Knowledge retention starts as soon as a new employee comes into the office for the first time. In almost every interaction between people, let it be online or offline, knowledge is created and shared. These interactions are vital for knowledge transfer, as most knowledge is attached to people and cannot be captured in formal ways.

Instead of trying to document everything and controlling knowledge transfer, invest your efforts in facilitating knowledge networking. Allow employees to connect and interact with each other using simple tools. By doing so knowledge is naturally disseminated across the organization. In case an employee leaves the company, there are others that (most probably) carry parts of his work-related knowledge or know someone that knows. In the end, this informal approach to knowledge retention could save the company considerable amounts of money, because people do not have to spend extra time for interviews / questionnaires etc. when leaving the company and new people can get up to speed much quicker, as they can rely on the help and knowledge of the other employees.

I believe that the notion of knowledge retention as a one-off activity in a distant future will soon disappear. Instead, organizations will need to find ways to make it part of employees' day-to-day work - from their first to their last day at the organization.

That's easier said than done, but here are some tactics that can help to achieve that:

1) Increase transparency
Large organizations are 'famous' for re-inventing the wheel, since the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. Give employees smart tools that enable them to easily communicate, collaborate and connect with each other on an organization-wide level.

2) Enable free flow of information
Too often gatekeepers and inappropriate tools are major barriers to information flow. Employees should be able to decide what information is important and relevant to their work.

3) Focus on personal productivity
Employees are primarily concerned about their own performance. Give them simple tools that make them more productive, but which at the same time make use of network effects and benefit the organization as a whole.

4) Get out of the way!
Facilitate but don't control!

Surely, this is by no means an exhaustive list of tactics. If you have any other thoughts or suggestions on how to tackle knowledge retention, please consider leaving your comment below.

9 Comments

user-pic

You've written a great job description of the 21st century knowledge manager. Now we just need to follow it!

Thanks, Christoph.

- Mary

user-pic

What about the possibility of developing lower level staff to assume additional leadership responsibility? That is, have them more focused on their future career goals and more sensitive to what they need to learn to be the corporate leaders of tomorrow.

Larry Wenger
Workforce Performance Group

user-pic

Christoph, nice post.

I've been thinking more about this "50% of employees eligible to retire in next 8 years". That statistic actually isn't so drastic.

This is drastic: according to the U.S. Department of Labor, the average company has an annual employee turnover of 39.6%. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turnover_(employment)

39.6%!!

That means that every 2-1/2 years, the typical company will see a 100% refresh of its staff. It varies by industry sector, and some employees will stay longer, some shorter. But it's a staggering figure, and a figure I don't hear talked about much.

user-pic

Thanks, Mary. It actually wasn't my intention to come up with a job description for knowledge managers. The term 'knowledge manager' is kind of an oxymoron anyway. It is a fact that it is very difficult to manage intangible assets, such as knowledge, brand, reputation or innovation. Experience shows that putting formal processes and structures in place to capture and transfer knowledge yield only poor results. That's why it is much more important to facilitate and nurture an environment which allows employees to connect, communicate and collaborate. Facilitation activities will need to take place on an organizational, cultural and technological level.

Chris, 39.6% annual staff turnover is indeed an incredible figure. I need to do some research about figures in other countries. Also, I remember to have seen an article discussing the cost that occur when an employee leaves the company. Will try to dig that out. Who knows, maybe it is possible to come up with an ROI in this specific use case.

user-pic

Nice post! Like your approach too. It relates well to Shell's ROCK program (Retention of Critical Knowledge). Google it, you'll like it!

user-pic

Very good points - networking is certainly important (part of point 1). I think the trick with KR is how do you get younger generations interacting with people about to retire, and also, if people are getting laid off - how does the necessary knowledge get transferred in the short term (maybe it doesn't).

Let me know if you want survey results from our recent KR research: http://www.i4cp.com/news/2009/02/02/lack-of-knowledge-retention-the-hidden-cost-of-corporate-downsizing

user-pic

I would think that younger generations joining an organization would be very eager to absorb all the information they can get a hand on. I don't think there is a lack of interest in interacting with the older generation (at least not when it comes to learning).

I would rather argue that new joiners may shy away from constantly interacting with/bothering other people for information. Most informal content is locked in peoples' email inboxes. Thus, a new joiner would have to send an email, pick up the phone or go to someone's desk. This is inefficient and time-consuming for all parties involved.

If someone gets laid-off there is very little an organization can do to retain his knowledge. The person in question will most certainly have to pack his boxes immediately or if not would most probably not be very cooperative.

Therefore, it's so important to acknowledge that knowledge retention starts with a new joiner's first day in the office. Give your employees tools which enable them to communicate, collaborate and connect with each other in very easy ways. Most importantly, give them tools that make them more productive but at the same time bring benefits to the entire organization due to their transparent nature. You will never retain 100% knowledge, but at least you can alleviate the problem.

user-pic

Thanks for the reply, Christoph. I agree with you on that regarding layoffs in the immediate term, there's not much companies can do if they hadn't started such systems, explicit or implicit, long ago.

Regarding younger generations, as a Gen Yer myself, I feel we're pretty open to asking for help and guidance; on the flip side, we also think we can do things better than those who came before us, and that the "old way of thinking" isn't necessary to learn. I've heard such comments as, "We don't even want the retained knowledge from other generations."

That being said, my comments regarding generations... More, how does one encourage older works who are not as accustomed to social networking online to use such tools - or if it's a lost cause. Obviously, there are many exceptions, but there are still a lot of people who aren't tech savvy.

user-pic

You are raising very valid points, especially the one regarding Gen Y's attitude of challenging status quo. I agree on that, but to be fair you need to know status quo first before you can actually change it.

I also agree with you on that people are generally open to ask and answer questions. However, that needs to be within reasons. People are very busy and often time is not officially being allocated for bringing colleagues up to speed. A solution could be that various people have awareness of a particular issue or that that information is being stored in a transparent system. New joiners can easily query that system or could shoot simple messages to a large group of people without interrupting their work.

Your last point is a very valid one. I wouldn't say that it is a lost cause, but it definitely is a challenge. We are talking about changing personal behavior and in some instances cultural norms, which simply does not happen over time. We can't expect broad adoption from day 1, but over time more and more people will use social tools as it makes them more productive. And the nature of these tools has it that the more people use them the more powerful they get. (see Tim O'Reilly)

Leave a comment