Intro to KM

Construction is a project-based industry. Therefore, it is not surprising that most of the knowledge of the construction industry is generated in projects during the process to deliver a custom-built facility in accordance with the client's requirements and business objectives. The ability to manage the knowledge generated from the projects not only can help to prevent the 'reinvention of the wheel' and the repetition of similar mistakes, but also serves as the basis for innovation, overall improvement and sustaining competitive advantage. However, the ability to learn from within and across projects are critical but difficult to achieve. This is often due to the tight timeframe of construction projects, and the lack of sufficient resources and standard work processes for managing project knowledge. There are a variety of KM tools commonly used for the capture and sharing of knowledge in construction, which can be broadly categorized as KM technologies (ITtools) and KM techniques (non-IT tools). These include Groupware, expert or skills directory, custom-designed software, forum, post project reviews (PPRs), communities of practice (CoPs), etc. Among the KM tools, PPRs and CoPs are the most widely used approach for capturing and sharing of knowledge in construction (Orange et al. 1999; Carrillo et al. 2002). The main shortcoming of PPRs owing to the timing at which it is conducted has lend itself to knowledge loss problem as many important lessons and learning might have been forgotten (Kamara et al. 2003), project participants are already preoccupied with new project and hence reluctant to devote their time for the purpose (Kartam 1996), emphasis on negative feedback (Kotnour and Vergopia 2007) and the insufficient willingness to learn from mistakes (Schindler and Eppler 2003). The significance of CoPs towards KM is generalized by Saint-Onge and Wallace (2003) as providing a platform for their members to pool their expertise, experience and ideas, and to find solutions. Furthermore, CoPs do not proactively capture knowledge. Knowledge is mostly shared in CoPs in response to the request for assistance from members or through discussion, instead of proactively pushed to relevant parties once it is discovered elsewhere in the organization. Simply put, if a question is never asked, the knowledge pertaining to the question is less likely to be shared. Consequently, staff might not be aware of the existence of certain knowledge within an organization, which hinders the reuse and the ability to leverage from the knowledge. In addition, there are also other main challenges faced in maintaining CoPs, such as how to retain members and facilitate their knowledge-sharing continuance intention (Fang and Chiu 2010). Moreover, the fact that the project team either splits up or moves to another project after the completion of a project is also not conducive to the capture, sharing and reuse of knowledge across projects. As a result, knowledge loss is not an uncommon issue. The high staff turnover, which was 13.5% in 2010 in the UK (CIPD 2010), has also further aggravated the knowledge loss problem. To overcome the limitations in current industry practice on the capture and reuse of knowledge, it is necessary that learning from projects is captured and shared "live" while it is being executed, and presented in a format that will facilitate its reuse both during and after the project (Kamara et al. 2003). The "live" capture and reuse of project knowledge methodology facilitates the capture of project knowledge as soon as the knowledge is created or identified (i.e., "live") and subsequent sharing of the knowledge instantly with the aid of information and communication technology to avoid persistent knowledge-loss problem resulting from time lapse and other constraints. The imperative of "live" capture of knowledge is supported by the survey of organizations involved in PFI (Private Finance Initiative) projects where the "live" capture of knowledge is noted as crucial by 76% of construction organizations and 70% of client organizations (Robinson et al. 2004). Furthermore, the need for "live" capture of knowledge is also indirectly addressed by Whetherill et al. (2002). They assert that a construction organization's only sustainable advantage lies in its capability to learn faster than its competitors and the rate of change imposed by the external environment, and that a need exists to "integrate learning within day-to-day work processes." The strategy of the "live" capture proposed by Kamara et al. (2003) attempts to address the cross-organizational knowledge transfer issues through particularly collaborative learning and learning histories and to facilitate "live" capture and reuse of knowledge through Web-based technology, respectively. The potential benefits of "live" capture and reuse of project knowledge are as follows: To overcome the limitations in current industry practice on the capture and reuse of knowledge, it is necessary that learning from projects is captured and shared "live" while it is being executed, and presented in a format that will facilitate its reuse both during and after the project (Kamara et al. 2003). The "live" capture and reuse of project knowledge methodology facilitates the capture of project knowledge as soon as the knowledge is created or identified (i.e., "live") and subsequent sharing of theknowledge instantly with the aid of information and communication technology to avoid persistent knowledge-loss problem resulting from time lapse and other constraints. The imperative of "live" capture of knowledge is supported by the survey of organizations involved in PFI (Private Finance Initiative) projects where the "live" capture of knowledge is noted as crucial by 76% of construction organizations and 70% of client organizations (Robinson et al. 2004). Furthermore, the need for "live" capture of knowledge is also indirectly addressed by Whetherill et al. (2002). They assert that a construction organization's only sustainable advantage lies in its capability to learn faster than its competitors and the rate of change imposed by the external environment, and that a need exists to "integrate learning within day-to-day work processes." The strategy of the "live" capture proposed by Kamara et al. (2003) attempts to address the cross-organizational knowledge transfer issues through particularly collaborative learning and learning histories and to facilitate "live" capture and reuse of knowledge through Web-based technology, respectively. Source: Tan, H. C., Carrillo, P. M., Anumba, C. J. (2011).

Based on this case study, answer the following question:

Question 3 (a) Elaborate FIVE (5) factors that influence the success of KM technologies and tools for the construction companies