Применение теории игр для управления знаниями в проектной среде

Also there are people who got exposure for participation in different projects. Instead of contribution you have more exposure and you create the feeling of frustration inside the company. You have to play with the achievement of people and their motivation, but you should be careful in order to keep the balance because exposure is just a benefit, it is not corresponding to the contribution of a person all of the time. You need to have a carrot for people in front of them, but you should be careful.

For me it is quite common situation that people put extra efforts in a project, but I believe that it is connected to the consulting environment. These are usually people who are more achievement driven, they tend to put more extra effort. It is either you do it for some benefit or it is your internal wish. I usually try to bring new people to the team and to give them challenging tasks. In any organization you have to renew your people because you will tend to find extra effort in new forces. Consulting firms work this way, you don't stay long on the same position. That is how you renew the people.

Могли бы вы привести пример ситуаций, отвечающих следующей проблеме: у сотрудников существует ощущение власть, ассоциирующейся с владением знаниями: индивид стремиться сохранить монополию на знания и уклоняется от раскрытия информации, что приводит к ассиметричному распределению информации, снижению эффективности потоков информации и перекосам в организации

As long as you have a high level of interdependencies you will have more collaboration. But in reality you need to have people who understand this interrelation, but this is not always the case. And that is why you have a mechanism to reward people based not only on what they do but to connect it to the success of the company. It can be even connected to giving clarity to other people on what you do, and you can connect it to the bonus. It is not black and white. Sometimes it is good to create a competition so that a weaker unit would look for innovative approach and gain more in the end. We can see the example of such environment in Google where they have hundred of projects in a very positive environment but still they compete with each other and Google people pick up the beast ones having own solutions. I know I am not giving you some concrete example as I don't have such experience from HayGroup. It can foster the innovative solutions instead of duplication. Sharing knowledge is also sharing preventive ideas.

In HayGroup Leadership and talent management department they create opportunities. But basically, productized services is the cash cow of the company and basically they are making the value of the company. So they do not want to share a lot of it. But leadership and talent are trying to make it smarter. So any time you have such situation, you have to think out of the box.

Могли бы вы привести пример ситуаций, отвечающих следующей проблеме: при распространении знаний за пределы проекта/юнита/организации участники сталкиваются с проблемами несоответствия контекста ситуаций, неспособностью других структур применить опыт или сами не хотят его распространять

Yes, it can happen. But even myself, sometimes there are situations when people I cannot do something. And usually I try to speak up and not to take a risk, but not in all cases. So the risk should be communicated I guess, but sometimes it is a question of resources and time a person has at his disposal. For example we have a great guy on the project, but he has no time to do what he said he was able to do and what he actually can do). I try to manage it from different sides and to provide extra support from my side not to have a failure and to cover this guy. But for the future record I will keep that in mind. And if I take a guy into a team on a long term basis I try to speak not only with him, but to get the feedback of his manager. You can not do that in case you work with a global leader… But in all other cases you can verify the info beforehand. In our company we don't have any special certification. We prove our abilities by doing.

Могли бы вы привести пример ситуаций, отвечающих следующий проблеме: в результате чрезмерного обращения к предыдущему негативному опыту в коллективе скрадываются механизмы защиты от обучения на предыдущих ошибках и обновления базы негативного опыта, что сильно снижает эффективность деятельности компании. Знания могут быть использованы в собственных и политических целях, что может подрывать стабильность организации и ее репутацию

Not really. The only example that comes into my mind is that you would rather have your enemy close to you. But I have never played that. But I would do that only in case there is a big problem, otherwise you don't work with people you cannot rely on. Sometimes you also need a person who is an absolute star or who has a know-how and you have no other choice even if a person is destructive to the team. But you have to value that person differently. And in the end of the day you both benefit from it. So success of my project will depend on his success.

Would you prefer to pay fixed or bonus payment?

I believe that pay is a complex topic, through fix pay you pay a competency and a background, you always pay a minimum (which can be huge sometimes). Through bonus you pay the performance. In ideal world if you pay high bonus a person should perform well, but finally you have to pay both high fixed and high bonus parts. So saying that I prefer to give higher bonus in order to succeed on a short-term as you have more flexibility. But for the long term you have to secure people and acquire talents so that you have to pay more. But pay is more a blocked than a developer. In the end the culture and satisfaction play a significant role in the choice of a person.

Have you ever heard of game theory approach to knowledge management?

No, I did not. And it is even hard to imagine it. But I think that it could be very important to have it as a part of leadership development exercises, in order people could better manage their motives and it can be very important for self-development and self-awareness.

Расшифровка интервью первого и второго этапов с респондентом II

Компания: HayGroup

Страна: США

Национальность: американка

Должность: глобальный лидер

Опыт: 29 лет в управлении проектами и консультировании

Профессиональная сфера экспертизы: лидерство и управление талантами

Do you consider that KM is important for the PBO

Totally. I mean, we sell our brains and experience in consulting. One may think that he is brilliant. And he would be a brilliant employee, a star, I have seen many. But the common mistake is that this person think that he is able to make it on his own, but usually it is not only about having great ideas or knowledge. It is about bringing it to life. And in order to be successful you don't need to protect your knowledge. Those who tend to collaborate usually are much more successful.

Could you name several methods of KM you use most in project management

I would not name many, I would name trust as the most important one and as it is the one that mostly impacts the success of the project. And it is the one that is hard to be established, especially considering that a team for each project is new and you need to start everything from scratch/

Did you experience the situation of declining to share knowledge within the team?

In fact there were lots of situations, just trying to figure out which are the best examples. Usually the organization incentives (and I also mean moral ones, not just compensations) really got in the way people want to be transparent, want to share what they know. And a lot of situation around clients can occur. For example I get a call from a potential client that has heard of me from someone or knows me or has seen my work in most of the times, and the client says that he wants to work with me. So I start to check if HayGroup has done something for this client before. And which kind of work we have done so that I would not propose something that has already being done and to be prepared. And if I find something I usually call or write to that person (former project manager) mostly an email. And in email I explain the situation and ask to explain me what has been done, set up a touch call. And I would usually get either no response or a response back saying “we work with this client, I know that person, you don't need to talk to them”. And usually it was because I've always been on a global role, I did not report to any geography, but all the P&Ls in the system were by geography and the people in the geography therefor did not want to share the revenue. So they did not want to share sales outside the geography. Now it has changed more now when we have the global counting and not geographical one as our clients are more global. So now people are willing to share more than it has happened in the past.

Could you say that global P&L establishment helps knowledge management?

It is not only that/ It is a cultural thing too. It is about having the idea to serve out client first and next think about the geography. Because historically the priority was maximizing revenue for geography versus serving the client. It happened that not the best consultants were brought to the client. So apart of structural peace there is cultural one connected to the priority.

Did you experience problems when people did not want to contribute to the knowledge management as it was accessible by everyone and what did you do in that kind of situations?

Here there once again are consultants who don't like to work hard and just want to be part of the project that is going to be successful. As we do a lot of delivery like workshops, facilitation workshops and things like that. And usually there are certain individuals that you know could be very good with the client in the room, but they would not do any heavy listing outside the room. And there is always a tradeoff between “I know this person does not do a lot of work but he would be good at facilitation” and “the other people who would do the work”. And staffing those people on project was always a double edge thing. It would always be nice to have a person who can both do the heavy work and be excellent in fron of the client, but it is not always the case. Sometimes you just don't have a choice. So sometimes you just have to balance the team.

Did you experience the political influence on people behavior?

Yes. I mean there is a lot of that that still goes. They are working on thing for personal interests and they don't want you to know what they are doing, they don't want interference. And that happens a lot with me particularly with productized services. In fact there is a lot of intellectual property in productizes services. It was developed by the organization I used to run so I have a lot of in-depth knowledge about it. And there is a decision that was made for all of the surveys and instruments and tools for all of the practices to go to productized services. It was made several years ago and the productized services organization has a tendency to keep everything secret because they want to do things for the surveys and instruments that they know I would disagree with because they feel like they can make more money. Even I feel like the do not do the appropriate research on the instruments and tools they want to use in order to make the change. So it is controlling it so that you don't/ Looks like power play, they are trying to coltrol the situation, but the concern about it is that I want to make money fair so that if you get engage, you should do the right thing and to help me develop the things that would let me make money faster.

Could transparency help in that situations?

Again I think that it is more about the culture. After the decision about tools was made it was also agreed that practices still own the intellectual property and control the design phase/ But when people from practices joined productized services management they have felt that the culture in there is not to be focused on clients and included a lot of hiding. So finally the has promoted someone from inside that was rather a user but not someone with deep technical knowledge of the development process.

Могли бы вы привести пример ситуаций, отвечающих следующей проблеме: знания являются общим благом, поэтому каждый из работников стремиться избежать затрат усилий, направленных на получение выгод обмена знаниями, но при этом потребляет результаты работы, что делает систему управления знаниями неэффективной

Yes, you see on a lot of consulting projects when working with clients that there are some people in a phase when you do a heavy listing which is the heavy work of the project no matter design, development, whatever. So people want to be part of the project because of the prestige of it but they don't really want to get involved in it. The one that I remember most was a project with a PepsiCo on a corporate level, so it was a big deal. And it was to help them with culture to make people accountable for performance meaning that they people whom they were hiring for the executive positions from the outside of the company had less experience than internal, but also even if people were promoted internally they did not have enough experience. It was when the PepsiCo was expanding internationally and they did not have enough executives to expand the business. The chairman wanted us to try and figure out who are the people who are not senior but who might be successful in these positions, the key capabilities they need to have and also he wanted us to work out the strategy to save he PepsiCo corporate culture. So as we have a lot of experience and made a good preparation so that it was sure that the project will be successful. So we were in Boston on this project out of NY. But NY senior manager was wanted to be part of this project as it was in his geography. And Pepsi is very prestigious. So I've invited him to one of the clients meetings. And while the client was talking the global manager of NY office was going through his mail. Not email, but actual papers reading it. By the end of the meeting the client whom I knew very well by that time came up to me and said that he does not want to see this guy on the meeting ever again as he is contributing nothing and just wants to be on the project.

Могли бы вы привести пример ситуаций, отвечающих следующей проблеме: у сотрудников существует ощущение власть, ассоциирующейся с владением знаниями: индивид стремиться сохранить монополию на знания и уклоняется от раскрытия информации, что приводит к ассиметричному распределению информации, снижению эффективности потоков информации и перекосам в организации

The situation that occurs mostly is concerned with my history in the company. So the organization I used to managed was acquired by the HayGoup. And we were both an R&D and consulting organization. And the same people who consulted often were involved in research. So we had a disproportion of knowledge around consulting, Leadership & Talent consulting. As people who came from the company knew both and were able to sell bigger projects to clients as they knew the benefits more and they were able to. So we were sharing the knowledge about the research and we were able to sell the projects better. So people used to be very upset with us, especially in the US because we were getting more work and more revenue and therefore eventually it made us sharing the knowledge with other units, so that we could complement each other.

Могли бы вы привести пример ситуаций, отвечающих следующей проблеме: у сотрудников существует ощущение власть, ассоциирующейся с владением знаниями: индивид стремиться сохранить монополию на знания и уклоняется от раскрытия информации, что приводит к ассиметричному распределению информации, снижению эффективности потоков информации и перекосам в организации

Well, we think more that accreditation system could help. We tried to staff people and we were trying to ask who can do that kind of job, people answered “I can”, but as there were no record of previous experience. So sometimes you could not verify what they said and when they performed badly there were a lot of cases when we gave the money back to the client as the work was done poorly. That is why we have set up an accreditation system and people with technical knowledge who are real experts could accredit other people potential. So any time when we doubt, we call an expert asking him to accredit the candidate. And it works pretty well.

Могли бы вы привести пример ситуаций, отвечающих следующий проблеме: в результате чрезмерного обращения к предыдущему негативному опыту в коллективе скрадываются механизмы защиты от обучения на предыдущих ошибках и обновления базы негативного опыта, что сильно снижает эффективность деятельности компании. Знания могут быть использованы в собственных и политических целях, что может подрывать стабильность организации и ее репутацию

I don't really have an experience at HayGroup in dealing with such situations.

Have you ever heard of game theory approach to knowledge management and how do you see its role?

I personally believe that I don't think that is would be that helpful on the mathematical basis. And why I say that is that from my experience the way project could be successful is to manage the real-life team and that means getting people committed to common interdependent objectives. And the leader needs to be able to understand the concerns of other people in the team. And the team members should be able to understand the concerns of other people in order to develop trust. And trust means to invest in each other's success not just pour own success. And when people are investing in each other success they tend to share the info and knowledge between each other. And they care about the project as they have invested so much. And also you have so much to think about in the project that there is just no time. However I guess it could be interesting for self-development and self-awareness. It is good just to know about it. You can use the zero game to explain the power dynamics and difference between win-win and win-loose and how do you establish trust. Actually we use it in our training. So I think that knowledge could be helpful to people, but the mathematical modelling is not so useful.

Расшифровка интервью первого и второго этапов с респондентом III

Компания: HayGroup

Страна: Франция

Национальность: китаянка

Должность: младший консультант

Опыт: 3 года в управлении проектами и консультировании

Профессиональная сфера экспертизы: нет

Do you consider that KM is important for the PBO

Yes. Especially taking an account that I've joined HayGroup in the very beginning of my career path, so I did not know a lot of things neither about HR nor about consulting, but with the company support I was able to learn it. And from what I have understood the most easy and effective way to learn something is to go and talk to people.

Could you name several methods of KM you use most in project management

Well, I have multiple managers. And they all always ask me about how it is going, if I understand the goals and tasks, if I am able to deliver it or if I need some extra support. But sometimes they also give me challenging goals when I need to produce a acquire a lot of knowledge. They help me navigating on whom I can ask about the subject in the company. They are really supportive as they have HR background so that they really understand needs of personnel and know how to manage people.

Did you experience the situation of declining to share knowledge within the team?

Let me think… Maybe in some minor situations it has happened but I cannot recall something major right now.

Did you experience the political influence on people behavior?

Well, yes, people always have different personal interests in the projects. And they want to get a better position because of the projects. Even I was trying my best when I was an intern in order to get in the company, but I was trying to show my work to those people who were in charge of the decision about hiring. And now I want to move to London office, so I take my time and effort to participate on projects about the Strategic Workforce Planning that are driven by the global leader who is kind of free-lancer and has a great influence both in Paris and London office. I learn a lot about this topic and together we have already delivered several workshops. Sometimes we even come to a point when I start to explain him how does the application work, not vice-versa.

Did you experience problems when people did not want to contribute to the knowledge management as it was accessible by everyone and what did you do in that kind of situations?

Of course, there are always those who contribute more or contribute less. I think I am the one who contribute more. Partly because of my culture, because I can not say “no”. So I do work a lot and I take work of others if it is needed and it is always connected to knowledge management almost of our work is based on it. Partly because I am here to learn. My goal is to get the most of experience in here in order to come back to China and get a good position in there in several years. But at some point of time you understand that you have too much to do and you don't feel fair. And I am at this point right now, so I am discussing it with my managers. I think that it is always the best think to discuss and to communicate your problems and worries if you really have them.

Did anyone ever refused to give you the insight of the project they have delivered?

To tell the truth I have never seen that neither during the meetings I have conducted and requests I have sent nor during the projects I have been participating to. In fact I don't think that it corresponds to HayGroup culture. I guess it is an open one, people are usually collaborative and supportive. Only sometimes we get a reduced info due to security reasons.

Did you experience that people did not contribute to knowledge creation?

Sometimes yes. I can notice it especially with top management. For me the reason is that they are too busy with their tasks and unless you are able to explain clearly the importance of what you are asking them for it is hard to get the meeting. But usually you have a support of you manager first and second sometimes you need to push more, but finally it works out.

Могли бы вы привести пример ситуаций, отвечающих следующей проблеме: у сотрудников существует ощущение власть, ассоциирующейся с владением знаниями: индивид стремиться сохранить монополию на знания и уклоняется от раскрытия информации, что приводит к ассиметричному распределению информации, снижению эффективности потоков информации и перекосам в организации

No, not in HayGroup.

Могли бы вы привести пример ситуаций, отвечающих следующий проблеме: в результате чрезмерного обращения к предыдущему негативному опыту в коллективе скрадываются механизмы защиты от обучения на предыдущих ошибках и обновления базы негативного опыта, что сильно снижает эффективность деятельности компании. Знания могут быть использованы в собственных и политических целях, что может подрывать стабильность организации и ее репутацию

No, not really. Maybe because the only situation I could imagine is that interns would compete to get a regular contract. But in fact they are assigned to different managers so that they do not have any incentive to compete between each other.

Могли бы вы привести пример ситуаций, отвечающих следующей проблеме: у сотрудников существует ощущение власть, ассоциирующейся с владением знаниями: индивид стремиться сохранить монополию на знания и уклоняется от раскрытия информации, что приводит к ассиметричному распределению информации, снижению эффективности потоков информации и перекосам в организации

I mean that there are different parts in HayGroup, for example productized services and work measurement, building effective organization, leadership and talent. So the most powerful in terms off making the most money and clients are the work measurement and leadership and talent. But I feel that productized services also have their influence. They have the stable situation as the clients need to take some surveys and use other instruments in order to deliver the projects in other units. But they depend on the clients of other departments. But talent and leadership would always collaborate with productized services as they don't have much resource in analyzing. However I've observed that they always have some parties for their department each month, but they do not include other departments. They are rather isolated from the other group. They contribute to communicating, but I guess that they feel their power in analyzing and they know that everyone needs them in order to conduct a research. Second is that other departments are rather consulting, but productized services are just services.

Могли бы вы привести пример ситуаций, отвечающих следующий проблеме: в результате чрезмерного обращения к предыдущему негативному опыту в коллективе скрадываются механизмы защиты от обучения на предыдущих ошибках и обновления базы негативного опыта, что сильно снижает эффективность деятельности компании. Знания могут быть использованы в собственных и политических целях, что может подрывать стабильность организации и ее репутацию

I am not sure there is some way to understand it. I am also involved in IT project where I need to consult both in French and UK IT centers and ask these people on how to integrate certain systems within our system. Each time I am not sure who can answer my question so I double check. Normally UK IT has more expertise as they have the centralized system if they approve, HayGroup France will also approve. It is just some technical concerns that I need to check, no contradiction.

Would you prefer to get fixed or bonus payment?

I think it depends on job level. If I am a basic employee I cannot attract clients in first 3-5 years, we are just doing the job, we put efforts to development. I am not even sure that the number of successful projects will affect my annual bonus. The commission would, but not sure about the projects. And I want to have the stable situation. And with the commission there are also a lot of questions about who sold the project. It is hard to define it. It would be nice to have different schemes for different departments and seniority levels.

Размещено на Allbest.ru