Appendix A
E N G I N E E R I N G KeesDonkers/PieterOo
D E V E L O P M E NT
Michiel Hillen Harm MunnekeI M S P R O D U C T I O N
Tjeerd Homsma Gerard SmedingH R M P U R C H A S I N G
Erik Roelfsema L O G I S T I C S
Patrick Edwards Bart MeussenF & A
P R O J E C T M A N A G E M E Klaas van de Poppe P L A N T S E R V I C E S
Andreas Brekeling Menno Vlietstra
I S A
Ted Rozijn D D C
Andre Gehring A T C
Vacature A S R/C Q D S e r v i c e Hessel Bouma
S U N C A R E G E N E R A L M A N A G
A l e x i u s C o l l e t
S E C R E T A R Y T r u u s D o s t
Vacature D S C
I N D U S T R I A L S U P P O R
Appendix B
Questions of questionnaire Culture
1. Which drivers (extrinsic and intrinsic) trigger the sharing of knowledge? Is it to improve the knowledge level of one’s own or one’s team?
2. Which artefacts (time, appreciation, culture) inhibit making knowledge explicit?
3. What is the sense of urgency of implementing knowledge management?
Competence management
4. Which technical competencies do you consider yourself good at?
5. Which non-technical competencies do you consider yourself good at?
6. In what way do you improve your competencies?
7. Are these competencies preliminary determined?
8. Which three non-technical competencies do you consider most important to achieve reduction in the throughput-time of the PCP process?
i. Robust designing
ii. Knowledge management / networking iii. Cross functional communication iv. Building successful teams
v. Risk management
vi. Requirement management vii. Project management viii. Consumer insights
ix. Competitor intelligence x. Ideas management xi. Managing outsourcing
xii. IPR (intellectual property rights) management
KM tools
9. Which KM tools do you know?
10. Which KM tools do you use regularly? And why?
11. Do these tools give you an adequate access to existing tacit and explicit knowledge?
12. What are the critical success factors of these tools, what factors give them success, which don’t?
13. Do they strengthen your competencies and in what way?
14. Do you think there’s something missing or incomplete within the KM-tools or the KM approach?
Employees and behaviour
15. Are you proactive in giving access to knowledge and can you explain how? Could you give an example?
16. Are you proactive in exploiting knowledge? Could you give an example?
17. Are you proactive in evaluating knowledge? Could you give an example?
18. What is needed for you to interact quicker?
19. How, to your opinion, can teams act more effectively according to the re-use of knowledge? (= Deployment of KM)
20. Can you give an example of how you fetch in (outside in) knowledge for yourself and for the organization?
21. Which three roles do you consider most important in a project team?
Inspirator
Entrepreneur
Practitioner
Conservator
Supporter
Thinker
Management and behaviour
22. What does the management expect from you according to managing knowledge?
23. In what way does management support you properly in developing your competencies and learning?
24. Does management give you a tangible direction and clear assignments according to making the team competent?
25. Where does management has to act pro-actively?
Appendix C
Organization
• There’s lack of time for making knowledge explicit
• KM has no priority at individual and management level
• Important non-technical competencies:
• Robust design
• Cross functional communication
• Building successful teams
• Nobody uses Domino.doc and usage of the I-disk is two times mentioned
• The critical success factor of KM tools is verbal communication. Obligatory deployment is needed; two times mentioned
• Collectivity is missing for implementing KM and KM tools
• When you want to achieve a quicker interaction, a broader scope is needed, mostly to facilitate verbal interaction
• When you want to achieve more re-use of knowledge rotation of team-members and more self-discipline and a constant check are needed
• Most important rules within a project-team:
• Entrepreneur
• Inspirator and
• Practitioner
• Management expects re-using knowledge, making knowledge explicit and a clear overview from their employees
• Management supports their employees in improving their competencies by offering courses and HRM/evaluations by management
• Management does not give a clear direction, but the employees want the right amount of freedom
• Management has to define KM and a certain scope according to KM and give more support.
• When employees talk about their technical competencies they never mention their knowledge area’s (their CoP)
• When starting a job the competencies are preliminary determined but the improvement of competencies is not. They’re dependant through someone’s interest, etc. Sometimes a career path is determined in consultation with the HRM department.
• There’s more interaction within a department than within a project team (especially for CTC and DQD)
Levers and rewards & recognition
• There’s lack of time for making knowledge explicit
• KM has no priority at individual and management level
• Nobody uses KM to improve their competencies
• Nobody uses Domino.doc and usage of the I-disk is two times mentioned
• There’s no adequate access to explicit knowledge because the knowledge is not complete and not up to date
• The critical successfactor of KM tools is verbal communication. Obligatory deployment is needed; two times mentioned
• Collectivity is missing for implementing KM and KM tools
• Giving access to knowledge mostly verbally
• Exploiting knowledge mostly verbally, sometimes via evaluations and never via IT tools
• People mostly pass on work when it’s finished
• When you want to achieve more re-use of knowledge rotation of team-members and more self-discipline and a constant check are needed
• There’s hardly a focus on outside-inside behaviour
• Management has to define KM and a certain scope according to KM and give more support.
No clear insight on the surplus value of KM
• Nobody uses KM to improve their competencies
• HRM tools and IT tools are hardly mentioned in relationship with KM
• Nobody uses Domino.doc and usage of the I-disk is two times mentioned
• Implicit knowledge mostly by verbal communication and mostly internally
• There’s no adequate access to explicit knowledge because the knowledge is not complete and not up to date
• Employees do not see the surplus value of KM tools and no connection is made between these tools and KM
• Exploiting knowledge mostly verbally, sometimes via evaluations and never via IT tools
• Evaluating knowledge mostly verbally
• People mostly pass on work when it’s finished
Innovative culture, behaviour and individually vs. collectivity
• Sharing of knowledge mostly for the team
• KM has no personal surplus value; that’s the perception
• Employees see the sense of urgency to share and re-use of knowledge
• Employees see the sense of urgency for collectivity, not individually
• Employees think their good communicators with a good project-overview
• Nobody uses KM to improve their competencies
• Employees improve their competencies by getting feedback and evaluation, learning on the job and taking courses
• Important non-technical competencies:
• Robust design
• Cross functional communication
• Building successful teams
• Everybody uses email, inter- and intranet
• Implicit knowledge mostly by verbal communication and mostly internally
• There’s no adequate access to explicit knowledge because the knowledge is not complete and not up to date
• Collectivity is missing for implementing KM and KM tools
• Giving access to knowledge mostly verbally
• Exploiting knowledge mostly verbally, sometimes via evaluations and never via IT tools
• Evaluating knowledge mostly verbally
• People mostly pass on work when it’s finished
• When you want to achieve a quicker interaction, a broader scope is needed, mostly to facilitate verbal interaction
• When you want to achieve more re-use of knowledge rotation of team-members and more self-discipline and a constant check are needed
• There’s hardly a focus on outside-inside behaviour
• Most important roles within a project-team:
• Entrepreneur
• Inspirator and
• Practitioner
• When employees talk about their technical competencies they never mention their knowledge area’s (their CoP)
• There’s more interaction within a department than within a project team (especially for CTC and DQD)
Appendix D
Competence matrix
Competence Matrix
Electronics People 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 A B C A needed B needed C needed A Gap B Gap C Gap A needed B needed C needed A Gap B Gap C Gap
Junior, Has competence, but does not master all aspects A
Senior, Masters the competence fully B
Principal, Manages competence area and extends it C
Competences
Electronic system architecture B A 5 10 2 5 8 4 0 2 -2 5 8 4 0 2 -2
Power conversion B A 2 5 4 2 5 4 0 0 0 2 5 4 0 0 0
Battery management B A 2 12 1 2 10 3 0 2 -2 2 10 3 0 2 -2
Motors B B 3 7 0 3 7 2 0 0 -2 3 7 2 0 0 -2
EMC B A 2 8 1 2 7 2 0 1 -1 2 7 2 0 1 -1
Human interface B 2 7 0 2 7 2 0 0 -2 2 7 2 0 0 -2
Sensors and actuators 0 3 0 3 4 2 -3 -1 -2 3 4 2 -3 -1 -2
Measurement and control 0 6 0 0 6 2 0 0 -2 0 6 2 0 0 -2
Analogue/digital signal processing 0 0 0 0 5 2 0 -5 -2 0 0 0 0 0 0
Microcontrollers and embedded software 0 0 0 2 4 2 -2 -4 -2 0 0 0 0 0 0
Implementation of modules C B 0 1 1 0 3 2 0 -2 -1 0 0 0 0 1 1
Power Sources 0 0 0 0 6 1 0 -6 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Power Conditioning 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 -4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Application/Process B B B B B B B 0 7 0 4 18 0 -4 -11 0 0 0 0 0 7 0
SW Design 0 0 0 2 2 2 -2 -2 -2 0 0 0 0 0 0
Electronics Design, EMC & Safety A A A A A B B 5 2 0 5 7 3 0 -5 -3 0 0 0 5 2 0
PCB Lay-out C B A B B 1 3 1 0 2 2 1 1 -1 0 0 0 1 3 1
Modeling & Simulation B B B B B 0 5 0 1 7 6 -1 -2 -6 0 0 0 0 5 0
Interfaces (mechanical) C A 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 -1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
now 2003 2005
Appendix E
Website lay-out
By clicking a certain Competence Area, the owner and the corresponding “knowledge”-files appear. The reason why an example is given on non-technical competence areas, is the fact that technical competence areas are confidential.
Appendix F
Interviewees
Name Function Preliminary
research
Research Workshop Global Competence Clusters Aart van der Pal Project leader X
Albert Enting Group leader ATC X
Armand Hielkema
IT specialist X
Bert Kooi Resource manager EDS, CT E&M manager
X BK Ching Knowledge officer
Snoqualmi (USA)
X
Chris Stanton Group leader X
David van de Weg
Project leader X
Egbert Boekel Head constructor X
Erik Houbolt KM representative CT SK X
Geertje Porte Employee CTC X
Gerard Cnossen CT M&D manager X X
Gerrit Reekers Groupleader ATC X
Gijs Breedveld Project manager Suncare X X
Herman Bos Employee DQD X
Jasper Zuidervaart
CT SK manager X
Johan van Toor Chief design engineer X
John Pietersen Black belt employee, manager YES-program
X Jurriaan
Leveling
Engineer plastics & deco X Karl Hinterman Knowledge officer
Klagenfurt, development engineer
X
Klaas Boschma Q-manager factory X
Klaas van de Poppe
Senior project manager X X
Luc
Vinkenvleugel
KM representative CT PMW X
Martijn Dekker Group leader ATC X
Michel Bleeker KM representative M&D X Michiel Hillen Innovation manager,
member of MT
X X Norman
Andrews
KM representative CT PAC X
Odillius KM representative CT E&M X
Name Function Preliminary research
Research Workshop Global Competence Clusters Benschop
Paul
Steenbergen
Resource manager PDS, CT ID&A manager
X Pieter-Jelle
Buijs
Junior Innovation consultant X
Rogier Braak CT PAC manager X
Ruud Schaake Group leader ATC X
Sietze Dijkstra Project planner X Tjamme de
Vries
Senior consultant X
Ton van Veen Business consultant X X X
Wiljan Hoekstra Knowledge officer Drachten X X X
Willem Tange HRM specialist Engineering X
Wim de Jager Project leader X X
Yeung Hung Kung
Knowledge officer Singapore
X
