Team-Based Reconstruction for Expanding Organisational Ability Author(s): M. Lind and U.

Seigerroth Source: The Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 54, No. 2, Special Issue: Knowledge Management and Intellectual Capital (Feb., 2003), pp. 119-129 Published by: Palgrave Macmillan Journals on behalf of the Operational Research Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4101603 . Accessed: 03/11/2013 03:36
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Palgrave Macmillan Journals and Operational Research Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of the Operational Research Society.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 202.43.95.117 on Sun, 3 Nov 2013 03:36:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

19-129 journal of the Operational Research Society (2003) 54, 1I

?2003 Operational Research Society Ltd. All rights reserved. 0160-5682/03 $15.00 www.palgrave-journals.com/jors

Team-basedreconstructionfor expanding organisationalability

M Lind* and U Seigerroth
Jink6ping InternationalBusiness School, UniversityCollege of Bords, Bords, Sweden

to stay fororganisations Inorder valueforclients. whoproduce of actors as a collection canbe interpreted Organisations is determined An organisation's theirability. to continuously is a needfororganisations there ability develop competitive thebasisfor thatforms andto takeaction newknowledge to create to effectively knowledge applyexisting by its ability is to the for means One assets. from ability organisational developing knowledge-based advantage competitive achieving of the contextin whichthe actorsareacting.One important a mutually establish partof the understanding accepted fordeveloping A condition of personal thesharing is to facilitate creation knowledge. processes knowledge organisation's level.Onetypeof knowledge to an appropriate of shared the amount the organisational knowledge abilityis to expand abouthow andin whichorder is the knowledge withinthe organisation actors thatneedsto be shared amongdifferent forteam-based an approach in order to satisfyclientneeds.In thispaper areperformed actions knowledge) (contextual bearson the Theapproach is presented. contextual to shared frompersonal usedformoving knowledge, reconstruction, about andtheories of extemalisation theprocess forunderstanding about of theories foundation management knowledge Team-based studies are three case from for action presented. Experiences organisations. understanding language in an efficient contextual to shared can be used for (1) movingfrompersonal reconstruction knowledge knowledge for at a base efficient for foundation at a work, coordination, development (3) arriving organisational way,(2) arriving and(4) organisational learning.
Journal of the OperationalResearch Society (2003) 54, 119-129. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601474

shared reconstruction; modelling team-based; knowledge management; knowledge; Keywords:

Introduction can be understoodas a group of actorswho An organisation have a mission to createvalue for its clients. The organisation can then be viewed as '... some actor(s)-based on

assignmentsfrom some actors-makes somethingin favour of some actor(s),and sometimes against some actor(s), and this action is based on some values, rules, knowledge and competence'. All organisationsare driven by some kind of rationality, where the management literatureof the late 1990s2'3has emphasised the need for an efficient value productionto satisfy customerneeds. One importantmeans to reach such ability to coordinatedifferent efficiency is the organisation's organisational actions45 performed by different actors. This means that there are several actors involved in the organisation'svalue production.Each action performedby its actor is an importantlink in the value chain. Knowledge managementis an issue that is on the agenda means to arriveat competitiveadvantageby as an important continuouslydeveloping organisationalability. 'The know-

M Lind,Research Collegeof University GroupVITS, *Correspondence: Sweden. University, S-50190 Bords, Bords,andLinkaping E-mail: mikael.lind@hb.se

ledge advantageis sustainablebecause it generatesincreasing returnsand continuing advantages'.6An organisation's ability is determined by its ability to apply effectively existing knowledge to create new knowledge and to take actionthatformsthe basis for achievingcompetitive advantage from knowledge-basedassets. Unlike materialassets, which decrease as they are used, knowledge assets increase with use.6 One purpose of knowledge managementis to manage the knowledge-basedassets. Knowledge is an essential ingredient in all business practices.7Knowledge is needed when performingactions that are of direct value for the client and also when coordinatingthese actions. Each actor is expected to have sufficient knowledge for performing his/her assigned actions, where these actions need to be seen as parts of of the wholeness, thatis, the value chain. The understanding both for action logic as contextualknowledge, is important and actions.8 coordinating performing Each actor in the organisationnormallyhas his/her own understandingof the value chain, that is, which actions to performas well as the orderof actions, for creatingvalue for can be more the organisations'clients. This understanding Differentactorsperformthe actionsin the or less elaborated. value chain, which implies that a mutual understandingof the contextual knowledge among the actors is needed in

This content downloaded from 202.43.95.117 on Sun, 3 Nov 2013 03:36:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

120 Journal ofthe Research Vol. 2 54,No. Operational Society

orderto manage an efficientvalue production.One problem of the value is, however,that differentactors'understanding chain often deviates. The contextualknowledgeneeds to be articulated and sharedamong the actorsin the organisation. A common language and a mutuallyacceptedview need to be established.9 Each actorneeds to sharehis/her individual knowledge with other actors. The process of creatingand sharingcontextualknowledge implies a need for actors to move from practiceto an arena of reflection.The actors need to talk about and reflect over their practice in which they normally are performingtheir actions.The actorsneed to converttheirknow-howto knowthat in order to be able to share their knowledge. The process of going from know-how to know-that is called reconstruction.10 Organisationsof today need to develop continuously in orderto stay competitive.6Developmentwork often emphasises the need to be aware of the way that business is performedtoday.Contextualknowledge needs to be created in order to be able to make grounded decisions about the developmentof the organisation.The process of reconstruction can be regarded as an essential part of development work. The process of creatingcontextualknowledge,that is, the process of reconstruction, demands a shift to discourse.11Habermas" has, in his theories, explicated the concept of discourse and argumentation. One unanswered quest is to find the balance between efforts concerningdevelopmentwork and business practice. It is common that there is a conflict between business practiceand assigning necessary resourcesfor development work. Developmentwork is often given a low prioritysince such work does not contributedirectvalue for the organisation's clients. Such a short-termstrategywill jeopardisethe possibility of staying competitive on a longer-termbasis. Therefore,there is a need to be rationalwhen performing differentkinds of developmentwork. Processes for knowledge creationand sharingof knowledgeneed to be efficient. The purpose of this paper is to present an efficient approach for arriving at shared contextual knowledge, team-based reconstruction, and its implications on the development of organisationalability. This approachbears on the foundationof theories aboutknowledgemanagement for understanding the process of externalisation, that is, the of and theories about reconstruction, process language action for understanding organisations.Experiencesgained from three action-orientedcase studies are used as inspiration to form this approach. Theoretical framework Knowledgefor human action in organisations One taxonomyof knowledge often used makes a distinction between know-how and know-that.Know-howis the ability to act, talk, and understandin social situations.Know-how is often related to the notion of competence. Know-thatis

explicit knowledge of how actors can act, talk, and understand.'0 Actors use know-how when acting. Goldkuhland Nilsson'2 arguethat collective competence is the constellation of collective resources and different individuals'competencieswithin an organisation. Collective competence can be the same as institutionalisedinter-subjective know-how,that is, a common ability among several individuals. The knowledgein the organisationis one of the important assets to attaincompetitiveadvantage.6'7 An organisation'stotal amount of knowledge used for producingvalue for its clients can be called organisational ability.12Goldkuhl and Nilssonl2 consider organisational ability to be constitutedby the following parts: * * * * individualknowledge institutionalknowledge inter-subjective artefactfunctionality linguistic and pictorialdescriptionsof abilities.

In the actual moment of acting, the actor uses his/her individualknowledge,thatis, uses his/her know-how,to perform the act. In this contextwe regardindividualknowledge as the collection of personal (for furtherelaborationof the concept of personal knowledge see Rolfl3) and shared knowledge. We use shared knowledge in the meaning of knowledge. inter-subjective In Figure 1 the relationshipbetween personal and shared knowledge is shown. Each actor (A, B, C) has his/her personal knowledge representedby each circle. Some of as actor's personal knowledge could be shared between several actors. In the figure below the shared knowledge between B and C (B n C) as well as the sharedknowledge between all the actors (A n B n C) are indicated. One aim for an organisation's knowledge managementis continuouslyto ensure the progresstowardsan appropriate

C'spersonal knowledge

ActorA

Actor C

shared knowledge
ActorB B'sand C'sshared knowledge

A's,B'sand C's

andshared Figure1 Personal knowledge.

This content downloaded from 202.43.95.117 on Sun, 3 Nov 2013 03:36:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

MLind and USeigerroth-Team-based reconstruction 121

amountof sharedknowledge. The sharedknowledge in an organisationis among other things derived from different actor's personal knowledge. Shared knowledge is also obtained through group-basedlearning.14Figure 2 shows the organisation's strivefor an appropriate amountof shared where a of each actor's personal knowledge, greater part becomes shared between all actors. knowledge One importantaspect of knowledge in general is contextual knowledge. From an organisationalpoint of view, contextual knowledge is an importantasset. This type of knowledge is in this context used as the concept for knowledge about the action logic, that is, the knowledge about actions-and in which order--that are needed to produce value for the organisations'clients. It is common that the contextualknowledge among the actors in the organisation deviates. Each actor's contextual knowledge (as a part of each actor's individual knowledge) is the basis for the specific actor'sexpectationsabout how others will act. It is thereforevital that contextualknowledgein the organisation is sharedand made explicit. Knowledge managementis in this context used to mean going from personal to shared contextualknowledge.

Reconstruction: An important part of knowledgemanagement The concept of reconstructionis often used to emphasise that something is recreated.In order to capture the contextual knowledge within an organisationthere is a need to reconstructexisting practice.By existing practicewe mean the way that business is performedtoday.By reconstructing existing practice,the action logic is recreatedin the meaning that the action logic becomes explicit. Something existing, but not fully understood,is made explicit througharticulation and description. An organisationis, among other things, constituted by people acting and communicating,15,16 that is, communicative actions.Therearerules and agreementsfor what actions to performand what 'action object'to use and to producein the fulfilment of these actions.17 Such action patternsand rules are social constructs,which can be the result of either

deliberate design or continuous evolution. In this paper reconstructionis used in the sense of reconstructingsocial constructs,in other words, articulatingthe way that people communicatewith and act towardseach other. Withinthe area of knowledge managementattendanceis directedtowards similar processes. Nonaka and Takeuchi7 call the knowledge conversion process of turning tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge externalisation.'Externalisation is a process of articulatingtacit knowledge into explicit concepts'.7 Explicit knowledge refers to, according to Nonaka and Takeuchi,7 in knowledgethatis transmittable a formal, systematiclanguage. Reconstructionincludes articulationof differentconceptions, action patterns, rules, and business languages.'0,18 In some sense, tacit, or implicit knowledge19needs to be focused upon andmade explicit.Tacit,or implicitknowledge is that knowledgewhich is gainedby experienceratherthan study and has not been reflectedupon purposefully.Consequently,tacitknowledgeis frequently appealedto in practice, but rarelyarticulated or even recognised.In the discussion in the previous section, a distinctionhas been made between personaland sharedknowledge,and both types can be either tacit or cognitively explicit. When performinga reconstruction, both cognitively explicit and implicit knowledge, personalas well as shared,are elicited and articulated. Reconstructionis about convertingknow-how to knowthat. An effective reconstructionprocess will establish a numberof importantresults:17 * partsof the business language(vocabulary), differentconceptions,and actionrules and patternsare made explicit * unclear meanings are elicited and clarified among participants * participants agree upon differentmeanings * sharedunderstanding of currentpracticein the organisation among participantsis established * a basis for evaluation and critique of current practice is created * quality assurance concerning future changes is established.

The needfor directingattendance during reconstruction Reconstruction, as stated in the section above, is about articulating individual knowledge. Implicit knowledge becomes explicit through reconstruction. It is, however, importantto note that some individual knowledge is not possible to articulatesince all know-how is not possible to describe. 'We can know more than we can tell'.19 A distinction can thereforebe made between knowledge that is possible to articulate and knowledgethatis not possible to articulateor is not yet articulated.20 Since individualsmight not be aware of non-articulated knowledge, it is very importantto find ways to direct the attendance towardsaspectsthatneed to be and arepossible to

Anappropriate amount of sharedknowledge

strive forextended shared Figure2 Theorganisation's knowledge.

This content downloaded from 202.43.95.117 on Sun, 3 Nov 2013 03:36:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

122 Journal ofthe Research Vol. 2 54,No. Operational Society

articulate.The hidden assets, that is, parts of the individual Sucha processof mining,the knowledge,need to be mined.21 is an inter-play betweenstatingand processof reconstruction, answering questions. The answers are described through differentkinds of models (textualor graphical). An importantissue behind articulatingknowledge is to determinewhat questionsarerelevantto ask in orderto mine the non-articulated knowledge. A question is a communicative act based on intentionsand beliefs. A stated question is a result of the need for knowing somethingabout something, where the questionbuilds on some implicit or explicit perspective(way of thinking). Dietz et a122 discuss differentdriving forces that can be used in modelling situations. They claim that both method and theory can, in a modelling situation,guide an analyst (see Lind and Goldkuhl23for a discussion about theorydriven reconstruction). Sometimes a theory is the main driving force, where the analyst utilises the generative power of the theory to put questions. In other situations a methodmight be the main driving force. In such a case, the analyst is using the modelling capabilities (notationaland procedural rules) of the method as the main question It is, however,important to note that the business generator. situation being studied must be taken into consideration when generating questions. A condition for generating contextual knowledge is sensitivity for context-specific details, that is, directing attendance in the dialogue to aspectsthat are of importancefor the contextualknowledge, which demandsan inspirationalsource built upon what the essentials of an organisationare. One purpose of using methods in the process of reconstructionis to document the answers correspondingto the stated questions. Different types of models within the method are used to document answers. Examples of such model types are action diagrams,8process diagrams,23 and Methods also used to are, however, cooperationdiagrams.24 state accuratequestions.Documentedanswersare important sources of inspirationwhen statingnew questions. The use of methods should be integratedin the process of reconstruction. Since methods are based on underlyingperspectives,25 there is a need for a congruence between the perspective used for stating questions and the perspective used for documentinganswers. Examples of different theories as inspirational sources are the business action theory26 and the theory of practice.1The intent of both these theories is to describe and explain business interactionas well as being theoretical lenses for organisationalchange. The theories can be used as interpretative frameworks when reconstructing, but need to be they supplementedby congruentchange methods.23 Theories and methods applied to the reconstruction process are used for inspiration and asking generative questions, that is, direct attendancetowards the essentials in the organisation and thus stimulate and channel our creativity.

Interactionas a meansfor organisationallearning means for compeKnowledge managementis an important titive advantage and for developing organisationalability. Since an organisation's ability is determinedby its ability to apply effectively existing knowledge, to create new knowledge, and to take action, an importantaspect to addressis organisationallearning. In general, an organisationcan be said to learn when it acquires information (knowledge, understanding,know-how, techniques, and practices) of any kind and by whatever means.14Therefore,there is a need for actors in the organisationto meet and to interact with each other in the reflection arena in order to discover the hidden rationalitiesthat are built into every day organisational practice and the patterns of causality of which themselves are often unaware.Such organisapractitioners tional task knowledge can be described as action knowledge, which consists of espoused theories and theories in use.14 The interactionduringreconstruction between actors helps us to distinguishbetween, and to articulate,espoused theories and theories in use. Organisationalknowledge is embeddedin routinesand practices,which may be inspected and decoded even when the actors who carry them out are unable to direct-put them into words. An informal communityof social interactionprovides a forumfor nurturing the emergentpropertyof knowledgeand developingnew ideas.9The enlargementof an actor'sknowinitiatesthe process of organisaledge within an organisation tional knowledge creation. 'One way to implement the management of organisational knowledge creation is to createa 'field' or 'self-organisingteam' in which individual members collaborateto create a new concept'.9 Different cooperation and collection procedures25can be used in the knowledge creation process. Examples of cooperation and collection procedures are individual interviews and seminars. There are two argumentsfor interactionbetween several actors in the knowledge creationprocess. First,the meeting between severalactorswithin an organisation is a catalystto expose and articulateknowledge. Second, the creation of contextualknowledge is about creation of knowledge concerning the action logic in the value chain in which several actors act. It is thereforeessential to create cross-functional teams that take part in the knowledge creation process. Contextualknowledgeneeds to be developed throughinteraction between different actors, who are parts of such a cross-functional team. A process of reconstruction with interactionbetween several actors is a way to expand the amount of sharedcontextualknowledge through externalisation of each actor'sindividualknowledge (sharedknowledge and personalknowledge). Reconstruction in practice This section presents three case studies in which we have wherereconstruction has been an essentialpart. participated,

This content downloaded from 202.43.95.117 on Sun, 3 Nov 2013 03:36:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

reconstruction 123 M Lind and USeigerroth-Team-based

The descriptionof the case studies focus on context and the process of reconstructionas well as experiences stemming from our involvement.The presentationof the case studies is the basis for a comparisonand discussion performedin the next section. Case study 1: Structo The first case study was performedat a company called Structo.Structois a manufacturing company,which mainly for steel into pipes hydraulic transforms cylinders.In this case was conducted,which was study a change analysis project business divided into two phases: diagnosis, and generation The of measures. purposeof this projectwas to andevaluation develop a method for business process-orientedchange adminisanalysis.At Structotherewas a need for integrating tration and production.Therefore,a change analysis was initiated in order to reconstructand develop the business processes. A projectgroupwas formedconsistingof several within Structo and two people from differentdepartments one of whom is an authorof this paper. researchers, In the beginning of the project a reference group was formed, which consisted of different representativesfrom the organisation. The selection of the members of the reference group was based on their respective profound knowledge of different segments of the organisation. were the respondentsduringthe interThese representatives views thatwere conducted.When performingreconstruction of existing practice, differentactors in the reference group were interviewedon multiple occasions. The reconstruction was a naturalpart of the change analysis project. One researcher together with a Structo representative performedthe interviews over an extended period of time. After each interview the researcherand the Structo representative refined the generated models. In the beginning the models were fairlyincoherent,but since the models were being reflectedupon between each interviewit was possible to identify some uncertaintiesabout reconstructed practice. were elaboratedeitherby going back to These uncertainties the respondentand posing clarifyingquestions or they were focused on during the next interview.In order to validate the understanding that was gained about the organisationa seminar was held to verify and manifestthe described larger that the way organisationworked. When the reconstruction was performed,the formerlygeneratedmodels (from earlier interviews) were used as input for the next interview.We had furnishedStructowith a tool to develop inter-personal of how the organisationwas working. understanding Owing to the complexity of the change analysis project performedat Structo,there was a need to gain a very deep of the organisation.The proceduredescribed understanding in this section required substantialeffort, but as a consequence a thorough understandingof the organisationwas developed. The business action theory was used in orderto focus the discussion on differentbusiness processes.

Case study 2: Ndssjd Inredningar The second case study was performedat a company called (NI). NI is an organisationthat mainly Nissj6 Inredningar manufactures wood interiordecorationsfor public environments. The purpose of this project was to develop a new change method, especially for the Swedish wood industry. At NI there was a need to develop an integratedview on planning and information procedures. In this project a project group was formed consisting of people from differat NI and us (the authors)as researchers. ent departments where differat NI was seminar-based, The reconstruction The were represented. ent professions from the organisation reconstruction was divided into two parts:an initial one-day meeting and anothermeeting about a week later. The first meeting focused upon the collection and modelling of existof how ing practicein orderto elicit an initial understanding the organisation worked.The purposeof the second meeting was to validatethe models elicited in the firstmeeting aftera period of reflection. Another importantaim of the second meeting was to initiate a discussion about the existing practiceandto startto questiondifferentpartsof the existing business processes at NI. During the reconstruction,representativesfrom NI almost immediatelystartedto question how they actuallywere doing differentthings. We had given and to understand theirown organisation them an instrument to look at it from differentlevels of abstraction. In this projectthe reconstruction was not performedin an this was thatthe new method for The motive for earlyphase. work did not initially emphasise the need to do change reconstruction. The methodinsteademphasisedmore or less unstructureddata collection. However, as the project proceeded, we gathereda large amount of unsorteddata about the organisation thatmade constructivediscussion aboutthe At this time we recogniseda need to relate dataproblematic. collected data to different contexts in the organisation. Therefore,a reconstructionwas conducted,which made it possible to relate different aspects to specific parts of the organisation and to understandthese aspects better. This understandingof how business was performed at NI was necessary in orderto proceed with the change work. In this case the business action theory was a good supportto help focus the discussion about differentbusiness processes. Case study 3: Hallsbergs Psychiatric Clinic The thirdcase study was performedat HallsbergPsychiatric Clinic (HPC), which is a slightly differenttype of organisation than the organisationspresentedin the other two case studies. HPC is part of the social medical care organisation in Sweden. HPC is an organisationthat treats psychiatric illness on long- and short-termbases. The professions that are represented at the clinic are secretaries, assistants, nurses, psychologists, therapists,doctors, and organisation executives. The purpose of this project was to reconstruct how they were performingthe work at the clinic. The clinic

This content downloaded from 202.43.95.117 on Sun, 3 Nov 2013 03:36:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

124 Journal ofthe Research Vol. 2 54,No. Operational Society

had expressed a need to understand, question, and evaluate how the work was performedas a part of a bigger quality project. In this reconstructiona project group was formed consisting of several persons representingdifferentroles at HPC and us (the authors)as researchers. The reconstructionat HPC was seminar-based,where differentprofessions from the clinic were represented.The reconstruction was divided into two meetings with a week between them. At the first meeting, data was collected and modelled in orderto achieve a preliminary of understanding how the clinic worked. At the second meeting these models were validated and refined. At the second meeting there were also discussions about the existing practiceas well as suggestions about better ways to performthis practice. In the other two case studies the business action theory was used as a supportand source for inspiration.Since the business action theory did not give enough supportbecause of its too specific business categories,we used the theory of practice instead. This theory is based on reaching an agreement about and fulfilment of commissions and was the basis for the discussion about HPC. Analysis: Team-based reconstruction In the case studies presented above there was a need to achieve a mutual understandingof how each organisation works. The case studies are comparedin Table 1. In all case studiesa reconstruction was performedin order to develop shared contextual knowledge for differentpurposes. As can be seen in Table 1 the reconstruction process took a different path in different case studies. There are differencesin what contextreconstruction was performedas well as differences in which collection and cooperation procedures were used. Different theories and different model types have also been used to direct attendancein the process of reconstruction.However, one can also find

similarities between the reconstructionpaths. Three activities, which appearin all case studies,have been identified. These activities are performedin orderto state and answer questions as well as to express answersin a structured way. These activities (Figure 3) are: * Interactivecollection, where questions are stated * Modelling, where answers are expressed and structured by the use of different model types. The activity of modelling is divided into two differentsub-activities: Interactivemodelling, where answers are expressed and structured togetherwith the respondent(s) Non-interactive modelling, where answers are further structured withoutany involvement of the respondent(s)

* Interactivevalidation, where a mutual agreement about the structured answers is developed between respondent(s) and investigator(s) The structureof the reconstructionprocess shown in Figure 3 has been used to categorise the experiences from the case studies.Eachactivityin the reconstruction process is characterised in Tables2-5. When analysingthe case studies, a number of categories that can be used to distinguish similarities and differences between the cases have been generated(throughinduction).These categoriesarepurpose, action, result, cooperation,and collection procedure. In orderto understand the contentsof an activitythereis a need to express those actions that are performedwithin the activity.Humanactions produce some kind of result which is based on the purpose of the activity.The result should be of value to the receiverof the result. In orderto come to the result, differentkinds of cooperationand collection procedurescan be used where differentactorshave differentroles. When scrutinisingthe tables one can see that there is an interactionbetween the differentactivities. The purpose of the whole reconstructionprocess is to arrive at a mutual

Table1 An overall of the case studiesduring reconstruction comparison Organisation Category Typeof project Motivesfor reconstruction Structo Change analysis project Tounderstand the organisational practice in the changeanalysis project Individual interviews NI Change project To understand the unsorted datain an organisational practice context Seminars withthe project group HPC Reconstruction project To findarguments to use whendiscussing existing as well as future practice changes Seminars withthe project group of practice Theory Actiondiagrams Process diagrams Cooperation diagrams

Coop.procedures attendance Directing Modeltypesused

Businessactiontheory Actiondiagrams Processdiagrams

This content downloaded from 202.43.95.117 on Sun, 3 Nov 2013 03:36:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

125 reconstruction MLind and USeigerroth-Team-based I L MODELLING I

Interactive
collection

Interactive
modelling

Non-interactive
modelling validation interactive

process (simplified Figure 3 Activitiesin the reconstruction version). understanding of existing practice in the organisation. Different models are used and continuously improved the reconstruction process,where a sharedunderthroughout standingof existing practiceis developed in a hermeneutic way. The models are the recordings of an understanding upon which agreementis to be reached.Agreement,then, is achieved by progressivemutual commitmentto, or acceptance of, the understandingexpressed in evolving models. We believe that the social world, where human beings interact,is coordinated throughpromisesand acceptances.16 The actors in the organisationneed to validate models in orderto ensure high quality and that the models accurately reflectthe actionpatterns,thatis, reflectupon the contextual

knowledgewithin the organisation.Such validationcan lead to a need for revision, that is, new questions have to be asked, as well as establishing points of clarification.The differencebetween revision and clarificationis that revision is a need for complementaryknowledge from the actors of the involved and clarificationis a need for restructuring be done can The clarification articulated knowledge. already but the revision the non-interactive modelling activity, by means that there is a need to go back to the interactive collection activity. The non-interactivemodelling activity might also lead to a furtherneed for revision. In all of the case studies interactive collection and interactive modelling were intertwined. In the interactive collection, activity questions are asked and the answers of the questions are expressed and formalised in different models during the integrativemodelling activity. The gento focus on contexteratedmodels will help the participants relatedaspects, which will result in new questionsto ask in feel the interactivecollection activity.When the participants thatthe model complexitybecomes too high, there is a need to move on to the non-interactive modelling activity,that is, when a certain degree of saturationhas been reached with

collection reconstruction of interactive Table2 Theimplication during

Case

Category Purpose

Structo dataabout Togather verydetailed in the the existing practice business

NI

HPC

detailed data To gather rather aboutthe existing practice in the business

Actions Result Coop.procedure

Askingquestions andinitialcontextual to Answers questions (unformalised) knowledge Seminar Interviews withone respondent at a time

reconstruction Table3 Theimplication of interactive modelling during

Case

Category Purpose Actions

Structo

NI

HPC

To mine the organisation to gain understandingof existingpractice

to usedmethods andstructure answers To document according answers Documenting answers Structuring answers Clarifying

Result

models Preliminary Extended amount of contextual knowledge Interviews withone respondent at a time

models Preliminary Extended amount of contextual knowledge Log book Seminar

Coop.procedure

This content downloaded from 202.43.95.117 on Sun, 3 Nov 2013 03:36:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

126 Journal ofthe Research 2 Vol. 54,No. Operational Society

Table4 Theimplication of non-interactive reconstruction modelling during

Case Category Structo NI HPC

Purpose Actions

To refinethe preliminary modelsandthe contextual knowledge the models(further Refining structuring) Checkcongruency Analysis modelsand Processedmodels and other documents, need for Log book,processed otherdocuments, new information, need for revirevisionof modelsby obtaining
sion of models by obtainingnew andrefinedstructure information, of contextualknowledge and refinedstructureof contextualknowledge

Result

Coop. procedure

Individualwork for the investigator(s)(respondentis not taking part)

Table5 Theimplication of interactive validation reconstruction during

Case Category Purpose Structo NI HPC

To arrive at a mutual agreementconcerning the structuredanswers and an appropriate amount of shared contextualknowledge

Actions Result

An extended/appropriate amount of shared contextualknowledge

andstating Presentation, discussion, acceptances A deepunderstanding of existing A rather of existingpractice deepunderstanding and andexternal practice (bothfor internal (bothforinternal parties) external parties) models models Accepted Accepted Need forrevision of modelsby new information obtaining Need forclarification through restructuring Continuous verification at recurrentinterviews as well as at a seminar

Need for revision of modelsby obtaining new information Need forclarification through restructuring Seminar

An extended/ appropriateamountof shared contextual knowledge

Coop.procedure

a mass of answersthere is a need respect to comprehending to move on. Figure4 describesthe reconstruction processbased on the reasoning above. The figure is a further elaboration of

Questions

described in

Answers Answers
models
Nondescribed inExtended

models

of understanding
Interactive stingpraxis.

Interactive

Interactive Preliminary

Refined

Needfor

revision

Needfor clarification

Need for

and Figure4 Thereconstruction process: reaching understanding agreement.

Figure 3. The difference between the two figures is that we now have accentuatedthe purpose of reaching mutual and agreement. understanding In this section an analysisof differentways of performing reconstruction has been performed.We strongly emphasise the potentialin performingseminar-based interactivecollection, interactivemodelling, and interactivevalidation. The in the seminar sum of the knowledgeheld by the participants needs to cover the action in the group logic organisation. Team-based reconstruction implies a high degreeof seminarbased cooperationand collection proceduresduring reconstruction. Through a wide participationin the process of team-basedreconstruction, an appropriate amountof shared contextualknowledge can be reached. The aim is that this shared contextualknowledge is based on a mutual understandingand agreementabouthow the organisationworks.

This content downloaded from 202.43.95.117 on Sun, 3 Nov 2013 03:36:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

MLind and USeigerroth-Team-based reconstruction 127

Personal

knowledge

Articulation

(1

ActorA

Actor As explicit knowledge

Interactive
learning

Shared
knowledgeP

+\=
knowledge
Articulation

((7
Shared explicit knowledge

Shared
knowledge (extended)

Actor

Actor B's explicit knowledge

State 0

State 1
reconstruction: an extended amount of shared Figure5 Theprocessof team-based reaching knowledge.

to Figure 5 shows the aim of team-basedreconstruction: the shared contextual interaction expand knowledgethrough and articulation.This is done by making each actor's(actor A and actorB: note thatthe numberof actorsin the seminar should be more than two) personal knowledge explicit. By having these actors in the same room at the same time interacting,they will both learn from each other and learn from themselves by just articulatingtheir own knowledge. Each actor contributeswith his or her personal knowledge (that is made explicit) in orderto arriveat a sharedexplicit knowledge. The process of making the knowledge sharedis a continuousprocess. Conclusions and further research There is a need for organisationsof today continuouslyto develop their ability. One importantmeans of enhancing such a development process is to manage the knowledge assets in the organisation.Individualswho carry the knowledge form organisations where such knowledge can be regarded as personal as well as shared. In order to stay competitive an important aim for an organisation is to manage an appropriateamount of shared knowledge. To move from personalto sharedknowledge is one task for an organisation's knowledge creationprocess. In this paper we have elaboratedon the approachteambased reconstructionfor facilitating the sharing of knowledge in an organisation.This approachhas been generated from an analysis of performedreconstructions in three case studies and with inspirationfrom theories about knowledge management and language/action. The process of teambased reconstructionconsists of four essential inter-related

reconstructionactivities: interactive collection, interactive modelling, non-interactive modelling, and interactive validation. One type of knowledge that to a certaindegree needs to be shared among the actors of an organisation is the knowledge of what actions, and in which order,to perform in order to satisfy the clients of the organisation. Such knowledge is called contextual knowledge. Since a lot of actors participate in the process of fulfilling the clients' needs, it is importantthat different actors contributewith their knowledge about action logic. It is thereforevital that actorswithin the organisationlearnfrom each otherthrough interaction.The ontological dimension of knowledge creation is 'communities of interaction'that contributeto the amplification and development of knowledge.9 A high degree of participationin the reconstructionprocess drives the actors involved to expand their individual knowledge throughinteractionand articulation.By using communities of interaction an appropriatelevel of shared contextual knowledge between different actors can be agreed upon. The result of a process of expandingthe sharedknowledge is an expanded individual knowledge used for performing

amount Appropriate of sharedknowledge

MIN

AMOUNT OFSHARED KNOWLEDGE

MAX

amount of sharedknowledge. Figure 6 The appropriate

This content downloaded from 202.43.95.117 on Sun, 3 Nov 2013 03:36:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ofthe Research Vol. 2 128 Journal 54,No. Operational Society

good business and staying competitive.Throughexpansion of the individualknowledgethe organisational ability can be increased. The best case for an organisationwould be to arriveat an amount of shared contextualknowledge. It is, appropriate amount of however, hard to evaluate when the appropriate sharedknowledge is reached.Thereis an importantdistincamountof shared tion betweenthe conceptionof appropriate knowledge in relation to a minimum and a maximum amountof sharedknowledge (see Figure 6) for performing good business. amount of Depending on the situation, the appropriate sharedknowledge for an organisationwill vary. In Figure 6 this is shown with the control that can go either to the left amount or to the right but always representsan appropriate of sharedknowledge for a certainsituation.Some situations demandmore sharedknowledge than othersand vice versa. The balancebetween efforts concerningdevelopmentwork, that is, reflection-orientedwork, and business practice amount of shared should be determinedby the appropriate business. One way for needed knowledge performinggood for an organisation to advance towards ati appropriate amount of shared contextual knowledge is to perform team-basedreconstruction. The process of team-based reconstruction has some needed to facilitatethe movement importantcharacteristics towards an appropriate amount of shared contextual knowledge: * The compositionof the team during reconstruction.The team should representa cross-sectionof the organisation, in order both horizontallyand vertically.This is important to ensure that the team represents or holds as much An imporknowledge as possible about the organisation. tant condition for generatingcontextualknowledge is by interactionbetween actorswho reallyperformthe actions within the action pattern.They are the ones that hold the knowledge about which actions to perform. * Supportfor directing attendance during reconstruction. In orderto be able to mine the knowledgeassets, personal and shared,there is a need for supportthat triggers the actors to articulatethe non-articulated knowledge. Interaction in itself facilitates the process of directing attendance towards important and relevant aspects. Other identified supports for giving structureand generating relevantquestions are theories and methods. Theory and towardsessential method can help us to directattendance aspects in an organisation.Theory and method are also a supportand inspirationwhen stating questions to trigger and entice members of the team to articulate their personalknowledge that then can be shared. * Team-basedreconstructionis, and must be, a dynamic process. It is importantto facilitatecontinuousexternalisation of knowledge throughoutthe whole process. The members of the team are given possibilities to learn

successively in three of the four major activities. These activities are interactivecollection, interactivemodelling, and interactivevalidation. Actors will learn more when they interactcomparedto if the reconstructionis made individually. Externalised knowledge is also a source to direct and redirect attendance towards aspects that otherwise can be left unknown. * Reconstructionof existing practice should be time and resource efficient. Since organisations often have problems in allocating personnel, time, and resources for development work then they will also jeopardise the possibilities of performingknowledge creationprocesses. One way to facilitatethe needs of being time and resource efficient is to perform team-based reconstruction,since interactionin teams is a way to facilitatea broadlearning process in a short amount of time. Organisational learningcan, in the context of team-based be seen as something that goes on throughreconstruction, out the reconstruction process. However, organisational learningis more obvious duringthe interactiveparts of the reconstruction process, that is, duringcollection, modelling, and validation.Even if interactivevalidationis accentuated in the end of the process there will be more or less explicit validationthroughoutthe process since actors in the organisation are forced to continuouslyinteractwith each other and reach agreements on how to view the organisation. One importantaspect of organisationallearning is articulation of knowledge and interactionbetween actors in the organisation. Even if there are many advantagesin performinga teambased reconstructionthere are, of course, a number of limitations with the approach.One such limitation is that it can be hard to go into detail that does not concern all process. Other taking part in the reconstruction participants involved with the detail who are not directly participants to resources that it is a waste of feel spend time on might such detail. Another limitation can be the limited time at one's disposal for reflection.A risk with team-basedreconstruction, which then might be a limitation, is that the reconstruction process is too inspired by theories and methods and therefore the specific situation is not taken into considerationenough. The approacharguedfor in this paper,team-basedreconstruction, also has links to other issues of organisational is about convertingknow-how development.Reconstruction to know-that. Another important part of organisational ability'2 is knowledge about why certain actions are performed (know-why). Development of such knowledge should also be developed by approachesadvocatinga high in orderto ensure that actorswithin degree of participation the same organisationact on behalf of the organisation. Such a standpointis in line with the notion of goal setting Another closely related according to Riis and Johansen.27 area is strategy development using scenarios.28 Strategy

This content downloaded from 202.43.95.117 on Sun, 3 Nov 2013 03:36:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

M Lind and USeigerroth-Team-based reconstruction 129 15 Reijswoud VE van (1996). The structureof business communication: theory, model and application. PhD Thesis, Delft Universityof Technology,Delft. 16 Winograd T (1988). A language/action perspective on the design of cooperative work. In: Greif I (ed). Computer Supported Cooperative Work:A Book of Readings, Morgan Kaufmann:San Mateo, California,pp 623-653. 17 Lind M and Goldkuhl G (1998). Service Development as Action and Communication-From Process Reconstruction to Process Redesign. Paper presentedat the TwelfthBiennial ITS Conference "Beyond Convergence", 21-24/6-1998, Stockholm. (Unpublished). 18 Habermas J (1979). Communicationand the Evolution of Society. Heinemann:London. 19 Polanyi M (1966). The TacitDimension. Routledge & Kegan Paul:London. 20 HedestromT and Witley EA (2000). What is meant by tacit knowledge? Towardsa better understandingof the shape of References actions.In:HansenHR, BichlerM, Mahrer H (eds) Proceedings of the 8th European Conference of Information Systems 1 Goldkuhl G and R6stlingerA (1999). Expandingthe scope-(ECIS'2000). Vienna University of Economics and Business from languageaction to generic practice.In: GoldtuhlG, Lind Austriapp 52-58. Administration, P (eds)Proceedings of the Fourth M, Seigersoth U, Agerfalk 21 Lauder A and Lind M (1999). Legacy systems: assets or on theLanguage ActionPerspective on International Workshop liabilities? A language action perspective on respecting and Communication InternaModelling, Copenhagen. J6nk6ping reflecting negotiated business relationships in information tionalBusiness School,pp. 15-28. systems.WorkingPaper,Boras Studiesof Information 2 Davenport TH (1993). Process Innovation-Reengineering Systems, Universityof Boris. Work Through Information Technology. Harvard Business 22 Dietz JLG,GoldkuhlG, LindM and ReijswoudVE (1998). The School Press:Boston. communicative action paradigm for business modelling-a 3 HammerM (1996). BeyondReengineering-How the Processresearch agenda. In: Goldkuhl G, Lind M and SeigerrothU Centered Organisationis Changing our Work and our Lives. (eds) Proceedingsof the 3rd International Workshopon ComPublishers: New York. HarperCollins munication Business International 4 CastellsM (1996). TheInformation Modelling. and J6nk6ping Age. Economy,Society School, pp.-59-70. Culture.Volume 1: TheRise of the NetworkSociety. Blackwell 23 Lind M and Goldkuhl G (1997). Reconstructionof different PublishersLtd: Oxford. business process-a theory and method driven analysis. In: 5 Keen PGW(1997). TheProcess Edge-Creating ValueWhere It DignumF andDietz J (eds) Proceedingsof the 2nd International Counts. Harvard Business SchoolPress: Boston. Workshopon CommunicationModelling. EindhovenUniver6 DavenportTH andPrusakL (1998). Working Knowledge-How sity of Technology,Netherlands,pp 84-104. Organisations Manage What They Know. HarvardBusiness 24 R6stlinger A, Goldkuhl G, Hedstr6m K and Johansson R. School Press:Boston. inom omsorgen (1997). Processorienteratf'drindringsarbete 7 Nonaka I and TakeuchiH (1995). The Knowledge Creating Presented at Kvalitet'97. CMTO ResearchPaper (in Swedish), Create the Company-How Japanese Companies Dynamics of 1998:03. Link6pingUniversity:Gothenburg,Sweden. Innovation,OxfordUniversityPress:New York. 25 Goldkuhl G, Lind M and Seigerroth U (1997). Method 8 GoldkuhlG (1993). Contextualactivity modelling of informaintegration as a learning process. In: Jayaratna N, tion systems, Paperspresentedat 3rd Int. WorkingConference Fitzgerald B and Wood-HarperT (eds). Proceedings of the on Dynamic Modelling of InformationSystems. Published in 5th BCS Conference on Training and Evaluation of LiTH-IDA-R-93-05, Link6ping University, Noordwijkerhout, Methodology Practitionersand Researchers, 27-29 August Holland. 1997, Preston,UK. Springer,London,pp 15-26. 9 NonakaI (1994). Dynamic theory of organisational knowledge 26 Goldkuhl G (1998). The six phases of business processescreation.OrganSci 5(1): 14-37. communicationand the exchange of value. The TwelfthBien10 Goldkuhl G and Lyytinen K (1984). Information systems nial ITS ConferenceBeyond Convergence,21-24 June 1998, specification as rule reconstruction.In: Bemelmans T (ed) Stockholm, Sweden. Beyond Productivity: Information Systems Developmentfor 27 Riis JO and Johansen J (2001). Developing a manufacturing OrganisationalEffectiveness.North-Holland:Amsterdam,pp. vision. Riis JO et al (Eds) Proceedings of the IFIP WG 5.7 79-94. 11 HabermasJ (1984). The Theory of Communicative WorkingConferenceon StrategicManufacturing, International Action 1. Alborg University,Denmark.(ISBN 87-89867-89-0) Reason and the Rationalization of Society, Beacon Press: 28 Van der Heijden K (1997). Scenarios, Strategies and the Boston, MA. StrategyProcess. PresearchProvokingStrategicConversation., 12 Goldkuhl G andBrafE(2002).Organisational ability-constitu1(1). Global Business Network. PDF Format. Available at: ents andcongruencies. In: CoakesE, WillisD and Clarke S <gbn.org/public/gbnstpru/ex-gbnpublications.htm>. (2002(eds). Knowledge Managementin the Socio Technical World. 07-29). London,pp 30-42. Springer: 13 Rolf B (1995). Profession, Traditionoch Tyst Kunskap (in Swedish).Nya Doxa: Nora. 14 Argyris C and Sch6n DA (1996). Organisational Learning Received June 2001; accepted April 2002 II--Theory,Method,and Practice, Addison Wesley:New York.

developmentshouldbe performedteam-basedto ensurethat formulatedstrategiesbecome anchored. Knowledge creation through team-based reconstruction should be furtherelaboratedon. There is still a need for furtherresearch.One area of furtherresearchis to acquirea of the process of interactionbetween deeperunderstanding different actors. According to Nonaka,9 the process of knowledge creation needs to build upon mutual trust among the members.Another area of furtherresearchis to find ways to improve continuously the process of teambased reconstruction.One aspect within this area is about how to facilitatethe need to direct attendancetowardsnew aspects that are conditions for performingbetterbusiness.

This content downloaded from 202.43.95.117 on Sun, 3 Nov 2013 03:36:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions