diambil dari tautan http://kambing.ui.ac.id/bebas/v06/Kuliah/Seminar-MIS/2004/66/66_11_MISQ-26-03-2002-Anne_Mitzi_Tony.pdf

Pada sekitar tahun 1994 hingga tahun 2000, Nortel berubah haluan cara produksi barang
dari yang berbasis pada perkembangan teknologi ke basis pelanggan – lebih
mengutamakan kebutuhan pelanggan. Pada tahun 2000, Nortel mengalami keuntungan
yang besar dibandingkan pesaing-pesaing lainnya. Keuntungan tersebut dikarenakan
perubahan besar di Nortel yang mendesain ulang produknya (new product development).
Ketika mendesain ulang produknya, Nortel menggunakan pendekatan metode knowledgeintensive
work yang berbasiskan pada pengetahuan karyawan.
Fokus utama dari makalah ini adalah mempelajari cara Nortel untuk me-reengineer frontend
New Product Development dan mempelajari knowledge management yang digunakan
oleh Nortel. Tujuan dari makalah ini adalah memberikan suatu petunjuk bagaimana
membangun suatu model knowledge management yang sukses.
Salah satu yang melatarbelakangi perkembangan Nortel adalah ketika tahun 1980 hingga
1990an, terjadi peningkatan kompetisi industri dibidang telekomunikasi. Industri pada
saat itu antara lain adalah AT&T, MCI, RBOC, dan pelbagai ISP. Industri tersebut
berkompetisi dalam berbagai hal, seperti teknologi, harga, dan layanan. Alasan
peningkatan tersebut ternyata dimotori oleh perkembangan teknologi telekomunikasi
yang pada saat itu perusahaan terbesarnya adalah Nortel Networks. Nortel sangat
mempunyai perkembangan inovasi teknologi yang baik dan bagus sehingga kemampuan
telekomunikasi semakin bagus namun harga semakin murah.
Meskipun pada awal tahun 1994 new development product dianggap terlalu riskan oleh
dua orang eksekutif Nortel, namun hal tersebut tetap dilaksanakan hingga pada tahun
2000, Nortel memimpin industri telekomunikasi. Strategi yang dilakukan Nortel adalah
new development product dibangun berdasarkan process-oriented knowledge
management, mempertimbangkan faktor internal – seperti kemampuan perusahaan dalam
mengembangkan produk dengan model baru – dan eksternal – memperhatikan kebutuhan
konsumen dan mempertimbangkan kemampuan pesaing, proses mendesain ulang new
development product dikenal dengan nama Galileo sedangkan alat knowledge
management yang digunakan dikenal dengan nama Virtual Mentor. Tujuan dari proses
Galileo di Virtual Mentor adalah melakukan efisiensi dalam pengungkitan aset
pengetahuan multidisiplin, meningkatkan new development product decision-making
process, menfasilitasi pembelajaran dan pertukaran pengetahuan. Inti dari proses Galileo
adalah membuat jalur atau link yang menyatukan pengetahuan untuk tujuan bisnis.
Pertanyaan pada kasus Nortel ada dua, yaitu bagaimana sistematik dan tripartied focus –
proses, manusia, dan teknologi – menjadikan perencanaan dan adopsi dari solusi
knowledge management sehingga tujuan bisnis perusahaan tercapai dan faktor yang
mempengaruhi inisiatif sukses knowledge management untuk meningkatkan proses
bisnis.

Kesimpulan:
Kesimpulan dari makalah ini adalah menunjukkan bahwa knowledge management
merupakan topik yang dikenal sejak tahun 1990 dan knowledge management menganggap
pengetahuan sebagai aset yang sangat berharga. Inti dari penerapan knowledge
management adalah pertanyaan “pengetahuan apa yang perlu di-manage dan untuk tujuan
meningkatkan apa?”. Dan pernyataan dari penulis bahwa Nortel telah berhasil untuk
merencanakan dan mengimplementasikan solusi yang sesuai.

Di ambil dar tautan http://www.nickmilton.com/2009/06/quantified-value-case-study-8.html

Or more a “Quantified loss of value”. A recent Basex study is entitled “Airbus Hits Turbulence: How Knowledge Sharing Failures Cost Airbus €4.8 Billion”

To buy the report costs $200, but the summary is below.

“(This report)is the first in-depth look at Airbus’ woes, caused largely by
failures in knowledge sharing and collaboration.

In the coming decade,
as companies move from the industrial age into the knowledge economy, more and
more organizations will find that the cost of not knowing how to manage
knowledge work and knowledge workers will have a significant impact on the
bottom line.

The impact on the bottom line in Airbus’ case was €4.8
billion ($7 billion).

Two years late and with significant cost overruns
due largely to software and IT issues, the first Airbus A380 superjumbo just
went into service with launch customer Singapore Airlines. The A380 is now the
world’s largest commercial airliner, capable of seating 525 in a standard
three-class configuration. But the costs to Airbus were great: at a minimum,
it’s €4.8 Billion. With delays in the newer A350 program, which will arrive five
years after Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner, what will happen to Airbus next?

Far from being a unified company, Airbus’ management and production
teams span many European companies. The company is first now taking steps to
unify these groups but is it a question of “too little, too late”?

Read
“Airbus Hits Turbulence” and find out what the future holds for Airbus”

Now I know that Airbus is doing excellent work in KM, but I also know that this work is struggling with low budgets and lack of management support, and is currently confined only to engineering. I have not read the full Basex report, but if the authors are correct, and that lack of wider knowledge sharing is to blame for the A380 overruns, than this is quantification of the value of KM, or rather of the cost of not doing it.

Airbus sedang melakukan pekerjaan baik di KM, tapi pekerjaan ini berjuang dengan anggaran rendah dan kurangnya dukungan manajemen, dan saat ini dibatasi hanya untuk teknik. Tetapi jika penulis benar, dan bahwa kurangnya berbagi pengetahuan lebih luas adalah untuk menyalahkan yang A380 overruns,  hal ini dapat disebut  adalah kuantifikasi dari nilai KM, atau lebih dari pada tidak melakukannya .

diambil dari tautan http://www.nickmilton.com/2009/07/knowledge-management-in-oil-sector.html

My colleague Tom shared a story with me a while back, which I have been pondering on recently. He told me

“I was down in New Zealand talking to a company about knowledge management and the relevance to their service organisation. The meeting organiser was summarising the morning’s proceedings and I was sipping my coffee and wondering how we would get back to the airport when the question came. “Why are the oil companies so far ahead in this knowledge management stuff?” Now to be very truthful it wasn’t a question I had actually considered before”.

You have to wonder of course whether the questioners are right, and whether the oil companies really are so far ahead, but it does seem to be true that knowledge management has found truly fertile ground in the oil and gas industry. We can almost guarantee two or three oil majors in the MAKE awards this year. So why is that?

I think there are a whole number of factors here. Firstly the oil business is a global business, and the elements of the business tend to be the same wherever you go. So an oil platform on the Northwest shelf of Australia is not that different from an oil platform in the North Sea, and a refinery in Singapore is not that different from a refinery in Texas. The challenges that the businesses face are therefore common challenges, and solutions need to be shared and applied around the globe. Knowledge Management can be a real help.

Secondly the oil business is a highly competitive business. There is no true differentiation in product – the tank of petrol that you buy from Texaco is essentially no different from the tank of petrol that you buy from Esso, and the companies are not competing on product quality. And they are not really competing on technology either. Drilling rigs are leased from contractors, refineries are much the same the world over, and so are gas stations. Instead the competition is all about the application of technology, and the use of knowledge.

Then there is a very strong performance drive, and clear metrics. You know when you do a good job, because it is measurable. You can measure how many feet you drilled that day, or how many barrels you produced that month, or how long it took to get the retail station built. And if some other guy did it better and faster, then there’s a real incentive to learn from him.

Hence the focus on KM from the oil companies.

The companies use a variety of approaches. The Community of Practice approach is common, and communities are very active in Conoco Philips, Repsol, Chevron Texaco etc. These are very popular and very effective in the exploration end of the business, in knowledge-intensive areas such as drilling, geology and geophysics.

Another powerful aid to the development of communities is setting up a “people index” or Yellow Pages system. Texaco was a leader in implementing their PeopleNet system, and BP with the Connect system. Chris Collison described Connect as “a new way to access BP’s most valuable reservoir — one million man-years of experience”.

Lessons Learned systems are crucial for delivering performance improvement in the risky and expensive world of the international and offshore megaprojects, and these are applied with a rigor seen in few other places.

Discussion forums are vital for connecting people in communities of practice, and these can usefully be supplemented by real-time collaboration technologies. The story of the BP “virtual teamwork” project shows how desktop videoconferencing was used to bring global knowledge and skilled to bear on local problems.

User-populated Knowledge Bases are also proving to be valuable tools here. Schlumberger has implemented a portal strategy embodied in their HUB service on the company Intranet. They use this system both as a virtual workspace for participating teams, as well as a discussion and document forum for their communities of practice. Halliburton has something similar which they say cost them $17.1 million and delivered back $81.9 million in 3.5 years. Shell are developing the Shell Wiki, which is linked to the Shell University, and is rapidly growing to become the one-stop shop for reference material.

The major benefit that knowledge management has given oil companies so far is “protecting the base”, which is oil company jargon for maintaining and improving the core business. This focus is on reducing capital and operating costs, increasing utilisation and up time, and improving market positioning. Knowledge is captured and shared about topics such as increasing success in finding oil fields, reducing maintenance down-time in oil refineries, and increasing the speed of build of gas stations. But as oil runs out, and focus turns to renewables, then the oil majors are going to have to turn their KM spotlight on developing new knowledge, on innovation, and on rapid learning of new skills and new business models. That’s when the winners and losers will be determined by their learning speed and by the efficiency of their knowledge management. That’s when we will see whether the oil sector really has staked their future on KM.

Manfaat utama manajemen pengetahuan itu telah diberikan perusahaan-perusahaan minyak sejauh ini adalah “melindungi dasar”, yang merupakan perusahaan minyak jargon untuk mempertahankan dan meningkatkan bisnis inti. Fokus ini pada pengurangan modal dan biaya operasi, meningkatkan pemanfaatan dan up time, dan meningkatkan posisi pasar. Pengetahuan ditangkap dan berbagi tentang topik-topik seperti kesuksesan yang terus bertambah dalam menemukan ladang minyak, mengurangi waktu perawatan turun-kilang minyak, dan meningkatkan kecepatan membangun stasiun gas. Tetapi ketika minyak habis, dan fokus beralih ke energi terbarukan, maka jurusan minyak akan harus menjadi sorotan KM mengembangkan pengetahuan baru, inovasi, dan cepat belajar keterampilan baru dan model-model bisnis baru. Saat itulah pemenang dan pecundang akan ditentukan oleh kecepatan belajar mereka dan oleh efisiensi manajemen pengetahuan mereka. Saat itulah kita akan melihat apakah sektor minyak benar-benar telah mempertaruhkan masa depan mereka di KM.

Blog ini dibuat atas desakan kebutuhan dalam mata kuliah Knowledge Management…Semoga bermanfaat…

🙂