September 2002
Find The Experts
by Michael P. Voelker
How can a large organization avoid making the same mistakes and missing the same
opportunities over and over again? Expert management software finds internal
experts and leverages their knowledge and experience.
If you had a dollar for every time a CEO said, "Our staff is our most
valuable asset," you'd be rich. Yet while systems and documents hold the
millions of bits, bytes and keystrokes that make up the sum total of a firm's
explicit information, employees offer knowledge that is both explicit and
tacit.
Tacit knowledge includes the rationales behind decisions being made, the
nuances and shading of business information and the ideas and creativity that
are crucial to problem solving. In short, tacit knowledge constitutes
expertise.
"Intellectual capital is quickly becoming a major source of competitive
advantage," says Carl Frappaolo, executive vice president of the Boston-based
consulting firm Delphi Group. "Tacit knowledge plays a pivotal role in
distinguishing companies and poising them for success."
Every business manages the expertise of its staff to some extent. Early in
the life of a company, finding an expert can be as easy as asking the colleague
on the other side of the cubicle wall, but that is not a workable option for
growing and large companies.
"We grew about five-fold in the past three years, so what you previously
could find by walking down the hall or making a phone call became more complex,"
says Fran Steele, CIO at Intec Engineering, a Houston-based engineering service.
At press time, Intec was two months into the pilot stage of AskIntec, its
installation of the AskMe Enterprise employee knowledge network system.
Initial approaches to systematically managing expertise have often been to
catalog staff skills, usually via surveys, and retain that information in a
searchable database. But that approach has its shortcomings. Even if a business
gets a 100-percent response rate to the surveys, people simply don't update
their profiles over time.
"You can't expect knowledge workers to take on the added burden of posting,
tagging and putting their content into the right taxonomy and keeping track of
what projects they've worked on," says Frappaolo. "That process has to become
automated."
Companies can, however, encourage interaction with surveys. Defense
technology contractor Northrop Grumman considers employees' individual skill
profiles when assigning internal projects and handing out promotions. "If [an
employee's] profile isn't up to date and their resume isn't up to date, they'll
miss the opportunity for [assignment to] a new project," explains Dr. Scott
Shaffar, knowledge management project manager of Northrop Grumman's Integrated
Systems sector in El Segundo, CA. Profile data is kept in a SQL database
accessible via a searchable "yellow pages" of expertise dubbed "Xref," which the
sector developed in-house in 1997.
Enter Expertise Management
Because much tacit knowledge is contextual, employees often can't readily
identify the depth of what they know. Mountains of explicit information at any
particular business are a ready source of both content and context that can be
mined. They're what Michael Loria, director of the advanced collaboration group
at Lotus, Cambridge, MA, calls the "digital breadcrumbs" of business —
documents, content management repositories, Web sites, e-mail systems and
intranet threaded discussions. Expertise management systems apply taxonomy to
this content, build a base of experts and allow users to locate and collaborate
with them.
Several vendors offer expertise management platforms. Lotus offers K-station,
an expertise management and collaboration portal that is now part of IBM's
WebSphere platform. AskMe, based in Bellevue, WA, launched its people-to-people
software on the Web before creating AskMe Enterprise. Tacit Knowledge Systems,
Palo Alto, CA, offers an enterprise-scaled Expertise Services Platform and its
KnowledgeMail e-mail and document discovery and search tool. Sunnyvale, CA
Verity's K2 Enterprise mines documents and e-mails for "social networks of
people seeking and providing answers to questions on particular topics." Organik
software from Sopheon (formerly Orbital), Minneapolis, lets users create
profiles, then captures e-mail discussions in their areas of expertise.
The first step in the implementation of any expertise management system is
mining information. But is it a problem if there are a variety of formats and
distributed locations of content? Not at all, according to the system providers
we surveyed.
"It's the age-old question of how do you get everyone to store content in the
same format," says Loria. "You don't, but that's the secret of crawlers. They
read content in its native format and normalize it."
Andrew Dunning, director of marketing at Tacit Knowledge Systems, stresses
that, "One of the fundamental value propositions [of expertise management] is
there's nothing you have to do once you set it up other than to point it at
content. You don't need to manually develop a taxonomy, you don't have to
evaluate what's important and there's no prebuilt dictionary of terms. The
system looks at communications, documents and content, and pulls out nouns and
noun phrases. It chooses topics most frequently used in your organization, even
those that aren't in the dictionary, such as proprietary terms."
But if crawling technology is the foundation of expertise management, why not
simply use a federated search engine to locate relevant documents so users could
then contact related authors? This would, in effect, create a semi-automated
version of poking your head over the cubicle wall.
"You're putting the burden on the knowledge seekers," Frappaolo says. "They
get back a collective result and see that John Doe wrote a good article, but
does that make him an expert? To determine that, they need to sift through other
content and information."
The less burden placed on the knowledge seekers, the greater chance they'll
be able to effectively and consistently locate expertise. This is exactly what
expertise management systems are designed to do.
Search Tools Or Expertise Management
The main difference between federated searches and true expertise management
is the concept of relative merit of content. At one level, merit incorporates
the concept of volume: how many times a term occurs determines its ranking in a
search. But, just as a good Web search engine discounts artificially inflated
meta tags in an HTML document that lists a term 1,000 times, management systems
should be able to make a qualitative distinction at a more granular level. In
other words, there's a big difference between writing one document on a topic
that's been viewed 100 times, and writing 100 documents on a topic that has
never been viewed.
Merit can also involve timeliness. "We're not just counting how many times
people have mentioned a topic," says Dunning of Tacit, "we're evaluating whether
they've mentioned those topics in the past three days versus three months ago,
or if they mention the product repeatedly over time, versus a burst of
activity." An expertise management system should allow users to determine which
type of activity is most important to them in a given query.
Another difference between simple search technology and expertise management
is the level of oversight that an expertise management system should be able to
provide. First, there may be sensitive information or potential experts who do
not want to be inundated with questions, regardless of their expertise. Some
expertise management software can provide a list of frequently used concepts and
phrases and allow users to change, delete, make phrases private or add to that
list.
Because accurate results are necessary to make expertise systems truly
useful, some manual review is helpful. "The metadata on a document might be
misleading because it might not be filled out correctly, or it might be
inherited," says Udai Shekawat, CEO and co-founder of AskMe. "For instance, I
might have been the original author, but [someone else] took the document and
did the bulk of the work on it."
Expertise management systems can also combine automated taxonomy development
with the traditional skill survey. This is the case with AskMe Enterprise, says
Shekawat. "You can edit your profile to describe your expertise in detail or to
volunteer additional information," he explains. "Additionally, when the system
is live, based on your responses to people's questions, the system further
refines its expert base."
Northrop Grumman is taking this combined automated and manual approach in its
overall knowledge management strategy and is currently in the pilot stage of
installing Tacit's KnowledgeMail in its Integrated Systems sector. KnowledgeMail
automatically applies taxonomy to the e-mail employees send and stores the
results in a segregated database. An internally developed portal on the sector's
intranet allows employees to perform a federated search of both the Xref and
Tacit databases and find people to contact.
Updating and Accessing The Expert Data
E-mails and many documents are easy to add to an expert database because they
can be created and completed quickly. But what about larger projects,
continually updated catalogs or other long-term content creation processes?
Typically, expertise management systems digest information as soon as it's
stored to the network. While that leaves some potential for capturing errors
that are corrected in the final draft, Dunning says there can be value to
keeping a running evaluation throughout the editing process. The idea is that
the more content a system reviews, the better. The final version of a document
doesn't necessarily capture everything a person knows about a topic — some
material included in early drafts may have been edited out in the end.
To put questioners in touch with experts, expertise management systems
typically provide different search capabilities, from topical "tree" searches to
free-form and natural-language question boxes. Automatic routing features direct
queries to likely experts. Many systems have the capability to interface with
other user-facing systems such as e-mail, portals and CRM systems.
Expertise management systems should provide users several ways to
collaborate. With AskMe, for example, users can submit questions via e-mail, a
wireless device or the Web.
In the AskIntec project, employees can now enter a question via a field on
the employee intranet or simply click a button in Outlook. Intec has already
seen collaborative results that would otherwise have been difficult to achieve
in an enterprise operating in time zones across the globe. In one case, an
engineer in the Mediterranean logged on to AskIntec, reviewed questions that had
been submitted by employees in Houston the evening before and answered them
before those employees came to work the next day. In another case, an engineer
in Egypt posted a question to AskIntec and received answers from two engineers
in Buenos Aires.
"In both cases, the questioners received answers as fast as they possibly
could have," says Steele, adding that AskIntec also refers knowledge seekers to
codes, standards, specifications and other electronic content in addition to
subject matter experts. "Knowledge sharing is strategically important to Intec.
As consulting engineers, a significant part of our value to clients is our
ability to quickly leverage our collective knowledge and direct it to specific
problems."
Users of most expertise management systems can determine their level of
involvement in the expert selection process. "You might decide you want to
describe a problem and have it automatically routed to the most appropriate
expert," Shekawat says. "On the other hand, you might have a complicated
problem, and you might want to vet 10 experts by looking at their ratings and
their previous answers."
Installation time for an expertise management systems is typically measured
in weeks. It took six weeks to launch the AskMe pilot at Intec. But bear in mind
that expertise management is not a static system.
"At installation, you've got a software platform, not an expertise management
system," says Frappaolo. "The process never ends. The system should have a
manager to determine how it should be manipulated and refined to encourage its
usage and to eliminate obsolete content. It's an active repository."
Because most expertise management systems only point to content, rather than
store a copy in a replicated database, system requirements are fairly light. For
instance, a Tacit deployment for 1,000 people can reside on a dual Pentium
server running the expert profile engine. And the impact on other systems should
be negligible.
Nontechnical Issues
A business looking to implement an expertise management system should first
determine whether it has the infrastructure, both technical and cultural (see
the sidebar "Content vs.
Expertise Management"), to support it. "Will your employees mind having
their content hung on the clothesline? If they will, you have to get at why
they'd be reluctant to share their work product, including e-mail," says
Frappaolo, who adds that businesses should also recognize the potential
additional burden put on experts. "If a business decides it would be great to
have 'knowledge-knowers' available as resources, but then they track their
productivity as well" it may discover it leads to unwillingness to share
knowledge or even resentment, he says.
Also consider the effectiveness of knowledge sharing that already exists in
the enterprise. "The more geographically diverse the organization is, the more
it should be looking at this type of technology," says Frappaolo. "The more it's
focused in one building, the more likely there is an organic approach to this
already."
Frappaolo adds that you have to consider the volume and value of tacit
knowledge, which can't be captured explicitly.
AskMe reported an installation cost of between $40,000 and $200,000. Users
should expect a large deployment (more than 10,000 users) to require a manager
to work two days per week on the system.
Although specific costs weren't available for the installations we surveyed,
benefits were reported. "One benefit for us that's come bubbling up is best
practices," says Steele. "Within AskMe, there's the opportunity to identify
something as a best practice, so rather than writing out a best practice
abstract, you can capture an actual answer and take a minimal amount of time to
turn that into a best practice."
"In a large engineering organization, where tons of content sits in an
archive, the value proposition is enormous," says Dunning.
Shekawat agrees. "It's easy to deploy and the cost of management, because
it's distributed ownership, allows you to have a fairly low total cost of
ownership over time."
Northrop Grumman sees enterprisewide benefits to its use of expertise
management. "Our vision is to tap into the talent of anyone within this
organization," says Shaffar, who reports that the results of the Tacit pilot
have been "fairly accurate." To that end, the hope is to eventually manage the
expertise of all 100,000 employees across the corporation. "It's an incredible
proposition, but with Xref and Tacit, we're rolling down the path toward that
goal."
Michael P. Voelker is principal of Equinox Communications, Inc. He can be
reached at mvoelker@goequinox.com.