10 Years of Knowledge- Communication.org Results, Insights, Perspectives

1. 10 Years of Knowledge- Communication.orgResults, Insights, Perspectives Review of a Research Initiative August 2012 www.knowledge-communication.org Prof. Martin J. Eppler

2. Intro: Conveying what we know “The problem with communication is the illusion that it has been accomplished.” George Bernard Shaw “Everything that can be said at all, can be said clearly.” Ludwig Wittgenstein “ What matters is that we make ourselves understood.” Karl Popper

3. Reviewing our Research: 2002-2012 In the last ten years, we have witnessed... • influential knowledge communication research in management, education, applied linguistics, computer science and public policy studies, • the creation of several competence centers focusing on knowledge communication, • several conferences dedicated to the topic, • the creation of a chair in knowledge communication, • at least 6 publicly funded research projects on knowledge communication in different contexts. → It is time to review the progress in our initiative and in the knowledge communication field.

4. A look back and ahead in five steps • What is our topic and why is it relevant? • What have we learned about communicating knowledge? • What was our impact? • What are we currently working on? • What remains to be done? Appendix: Typical knowl. comm. problems

5. Our research motivation – 10 years on and still timely As organizational decision making is increasingly complex and dynamic, the collboration of decision makers and experts becomes an ever more critical component for the quality of decision making in management. Knowledge Communication Experts Decision Makers

6. Our main focus area:Collaborative knowledge work contexts Political Analysts Risk Analysts Con- sultants Engineers Lawyers Public Decision Makers Executives Clients Managers Managers FREQUENT MISTAKES ENABLING CONDITIONS METHODS = Knowledge Integration through Communication

7. Our main research question remains unchanged Howcanthecommunicationbetweenspecialistsanddecisionmakersbeimprovedwithregardtocomplex, knowledge-intensive issues, specifically in themanagementdomain?

8. Our resulting research mission Improvingtheintegrationofknowledgebetweenexpertsanddecisionmakersby understandingknowledgecommunicationbarriersandtheirrootcauses, developingandevaluatingknowledgecommunicationmethodsandtools.

9. A look back and ahead in five steps • What is our topic and why is it relevant? • What have we learned about communicating knowledge? • What was our impact? • What are we currently working on? • What remains to be done? Appendix: Typical knowl. comm. problems

10. What theories have proven useful? In researching knowledge communication we and other scholars have made use of these informative and useful theories: • Regarding knowledge communication problems • Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller et al.) • Group communication theory (i.e, Stasser et al.) • Knowledge creation theory (Nonaka et al.) • Clarity theory (Groeben, Tausch et al.) • Regarding knowledge communication solutions: • Adaptive Structuration Theory (AST) • Boundary Object Theory (Star, Carlile et al.) • Metaphor theory (Black et al.) • Cognitive dimensions of notation (Green et al.)

11. Our initial conception is still valid: Defining knowledge communication • We define knowledge communication as the (deliberate) activity of interactively conveying and co-constructing insights, assessments, experiences, or skills through verbal and non-verbal means. • The transfer of know-how, know-why, know-what, and know-who through face-to-face or media-based interaction. • Knowledge Communication is more than communicating information because it requires • conveying context, background, and assumptions, • conveying personal insights and experiences, • conveying rationale and reasoning, • conveying perspective and priorities, • conveying hunches, intuition, skills(implicit knowledge).

12. Framing: A process model of knowledge communication clarifies key issues Management Tasks Management Tasks Expert Tasks Expert Identification Need Articulation Analysis Transfer ofResults Application Who has theexper- tiseto analyze theissue? Howcan I articulate what I need toknow? Howcan I elicitthe relevant insights? Howcan weoptimize our mutual under- standing? Howandby whom canthe insightsbe applied? Macro-level Micro-level Macro-level

13. Description: iteration loops in the processhighlight interactive nature of k.com. Expert Identification Need Articulation Analysis Transfer ofResults Application Follow-up questions Refinement of need statement Follow-up analysis Revision of expert matching Suggestions for analyses based on application experiences Revised needs based on use Revised expert consultation based on experiences

14. Analysis: key problems in the process Management Tasks Management Tasks Expert Tasks Expert Identification Need Articulation Analysis Transfer ofResults Application • Prophet • Syndrome • Ingroup • Outgroup • Problem • A.S.K. • Problem • Big Picture • Problem • Paralysis by • Analysis • Yield loss • Context • Chasm • Common • Ground • Problem • Information • Overload • Knowing • Doing Gap • Cassandra • Syndrome

15. Typical problems in expert/manager knowledge communication • The decision maker cannot identify the relevant expert. • The decision maker cannot convey his/her true or relevant knowledge needs to the expert. • The expert cannot produce the required analysis (in time, with the right focus, in the right format). • The expert cannot convey the findings to the decision maker • technical language / perspective / priorities • information overload / complexity • unclear assumptions & consequences • tacit knowledge cannot be verbalized • The decision maker does not apply the insights of the expert adequately.

16. Solutions to Knowledge Communication Problems • Culturally: fostering informal, iterative exchanges, thus building trust and common ground • Organizationally: creating mixed teams that engage in visual practices and focus on the iterative creation of artefacts of knowing. Jointly visualizing instead of arguing • Technologically: employing knowledge visualization tools and methods (i.e. lets-focus.com) • Personally: improving knowledge communication skills (asking fertile questions, conceptual sketching), leading knowledge dialogues (cultivating openness and constructive feedback)

17. Example: Visualizing Knowledge Dialogues in real time (f2f & virtually)

18. Diagram Types (static) Structure Phases / Steps Relationships TimeSeries (dynamic) Process Clustering/ Positioning continuous cyclical linear linear hierarchical Network Venn Matrix Coordinates t Timeline Process Cycle Spectrum Pyramid Network Venn Matrix Cartesian Common templates for graphic knowledge communication

19. Our initial interactive overview of knowledge templates (visual-literacy.org)

20. Templates for informal knowledge communication (from Sketching at Work) www.sketchingatwork.com

21. Experimental Results: visual metaphors augment knowledge communication • Our results revealed that visualization-supported management teams outperformed those working without visualization in the following way (Bresciani & Eppler 2009): • Productivity (quantity of information shared): 26 % higher with visualization (13.58 vs. 17.21) • Variety of information shared: 4 times higher with visualization. (0.25 vs. 1.07) • Recall: 45% higher with visualization(5.8 vs 8.46), that means managers recalled almost twice as much from the meetings that were facilitated through visualization than their colleagues who only worked with flipcharts.

22. A look back and ahead in five steps • What is our topic and why is it relevant? • What have we learned about communicating knowledge? • What was our impact? • What are we currently working on? • What remains to be done? Appendix: Typical knowl. comm. problems

23. Impact: Research Achievements • Best Paper Award 11th International Knowledge Management Conference I’Know 2011, Graz, Austria. • Best Paper Award IEEE 14th International Information Visualization Conference 2010. • Research Award by the International Association of Business Communicators Research Foundation as only second Non-US researcher in 26 years. • European Union’s Information Society Technologies Prize Nominee for lets-focus software (rated as one of Europe’s most innovative software packages) • Carolyn Dexter Best International Paper Award Nominee, Academy of Management Conference, 2011 • Research featured in Harvard Business Review, MIT Technology Review, and BusinessWeek, The Guardian, and in O’Reilly Release 2.0 as visualization landmarks, as well as in more than 800 blogs and specialized websites , incl. several US Newspapers

24. Milestones: Key Publications • Pfister, R.A., Eppler, M.J. (2012) The Benefits of Sketching for Knowledge Management, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 16 (2). • Eppler M.J., Hoffmann F., Bresciani S. (2011). New Business Models through Collaborative Idea Generation. International Journal of Innovation Management. Vol. 15 (6), 1323-1341. • Bresciani, S., Eppler, M.J. (2010) Choosing Knowledge Visualizations to Augment Cognition: the Managers’ View in: IEEEProceedings of the International Conference on Information Visualization, IV10, London, 2010. Best paper award • Bresciani, S., Eppler, M.J. (2009). The Benefits of Synchronous Collaborative Information Visualization: Evidence from an Experimental Evaluation. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, Vol. 15 (6), November/December 2009, pp. 1073-1080 • Bresciani S., Eppler M.J., Subramanian S.V. (2010). Enhancing Group Information Sharing Through Interactive Visualization: Experimental Evidence. Academyof Management Meeting, August 6-10 2010, Montreal, Canada. • Bischof, N., Comi, A., Eppler, M.J. (2011) Knowledge Visualization in Qualitative Methods – or how can I see what I say? in: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Information Visualization. IEEE: London • Eppler, M.J., Pfister, R. (2011) Sketching as a Tool for Knowledge Management: An Interdisciplinary Literature Review on its Benefits, in: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of Knowledge Management Iknow, Graz. Best paper award. • Eppler, M.J., Aeschimann, M. (2009). A Systematic Framework for Risk Visualization in Risk Management and Communication, in: Risk Management - An International Journal, 11 (2), April 2009: 67-89. • Eppler, M., Mengis, J. (2009). WieEntscheider und Expertenredenlernen [How Decision Makers and Experts learn to talk together], Harvard Business Manager, April: 50-58. • Eppler, M., Platts, K. (2009). Visual Strategizing: The Systematic Use of Visualization in the Strategic Planning Process, Long Range Planning LRP - International Journal of Strategic Management, 42 (1), February: 42-74.  • Mengis, J., Eppler, M. (2008) Understanding and Managing Conversations from a Knowledge Perspective: An Analysis of the Roles and Rules of Face-to-face Conversations in Organizations, Organization Studies, 29: 1287-1313. • Schmeil, A., Eppler, M.J. (2012)  A Structured Approach for Designing Collaboration Experiences for Virtual Worlds, forthcoming in: Journal of the Association for Information Systems.

25. Milestones: Global Impact • Some of our research studies on knowledge communication have been translated into: • Russian • Arabic • French • Italian • Portuguese • Chinese • Danish • Finnish

26. Milestones: Our Citation Impact (2002-2012) • A total of approx. 1580 Citations • Top Cites in the time period: • Information Overload Article: 370 citations • Information Quality book: 240 citations • Harvesting Project Knowledge article: 200 citations • Knowledge Visualization article: 90 citations • Making knowledge visible: 50 citations • Visual Representations In KM article: 50 citations • Visual Strategizing article: 40 citations • Periodic Table of Vis. Article: 40 citations

27. A Few of the books from the Research Initiative

28. Major studies that we conducted during the time period IABC Resarch Foundation Study on Information Overload in Communication =mcm Study on Making the Complex Clear

29. Milestones: Conference Keynotes • Keynotes on Knowledge Communication at the following international conferences: • Learntec • ISTIC • European Symposium on Language for Specific Purposes • Swiss Economist Day • International Knowledge Management Conference Iknow • International Information Visualization Conference • International KM Conference Krems • International KM Conference Passau • International Knowledge Communication Conference Aarhus

30. Milestones: Our new Tools and Methods www.lets-focus.com Knowledge communication software www.collabcards.com Knowledge communication Card set and iPhone App Paths to Success creativity method and iPad app

31. A look back and ahead in five steps • What is our topic and why is it relevant? • What have we learned about communicating knowledge? • What was our impact? • What are we currently working on? • What remains to be done? Appendix: Typical knowl. comm. problems

32. Current Focus: Communicating to create new Knowledge: Creability • Topic: • Knowledge-based Collaborative Creativity (Creabillity) • Research Question: • How can experts and decision makers communicate so that their combined knowledge (through crealogues) gives rise to innovative business ideas? • Employed Research Methods: • Experiments with real-life managers • In-company testing and deployment • Focus groups • Surveys • Link: www.mcm.unisg.ch/Chairs/MCM+1/Projects/Creability.aspx

33. A look back and ahead in five steps • What is our topic and why is it relevant? • What have we learned about communicating knowledge? • What was our impact? • What are we currently working on? • What remains to be done? Appendix: Typical knowl. comm. problems

34. Future challenges: open research issues • Consolidating existing findings in a systematic theory of knowledge communication among experts and decision makers • Validating the benefits (and drawbacks) of different knowledge visualization methods for different knowledge communication contexts • Developing mobile methods for knowledge communication • Extending the boundaries of knowledge communication research to areas beyond the management context • Exploring the requirements and constraints of communicating knowledge for future generations (long-term knowledge communication)

35. Contact Information Prof. Martin J. Eppler Managing Director / Chair of Communications Management University of St. Gallen (HSG) =mcm institute for media and communications management Blumenbergplatz 9 9000 St. Gallen Switzerland martin.eppler[at]unisg.ch www.knowledge-communication.org

36. Appendix: Typical KnowledgeCommunication Problems

37. Knowledge sharing hostility Knowledge communication fails because the ‘knowledge givers are reluctant to share their insights due to micro politics, strenuous relationships, or due to fear. Husted & Michailova, 2002 Micropolitics of knowledge The ‘knowledge claims’ of an expert are discredited by the decision makers due to their differing (hidden) agenda, because of a coalition of people with an alternative view, or due to the expert’s lack of formal authority. Lazega, 1992 Internal knowledge stickiness Knowledge can sometimes not be transferred because of arduous relationships, or casual ambiguities regarding the knowledge or because of the lack of absorptive capacity of the knowledge receivers. Szulanski, 1996, 1999 Knowledge Communication Problems

38. Groupthink A (management) team may not truly listen to the input of an expert because of the team’s group coherence and group dynamics sometimes block outside advice and feel omniscient. Janis, 1982 Information overload An individual is sometimes not able to integrate new information into the decision making process because too much complex information has to be interpreted too quickly. O’Reilly, 1980, Eppler & Mengis, 2004 Self/Other effect Individuals tend to discount advice and favor their own opinion. Yaniv & Kleinberger, 2000 Knowing-Doing gap / Smart talk trap Sometimes organization know where a problem resides and how to tackle it, but do not move from knowledge to action (due to unhealthy internal competition or lacking follow-up). Pfeffer & Sutton, 2000 Knowledge Communication Problems

39. Absorptive capacity Limited ability of organization and its decision makers to integrate the knowledge of experts based on lack of prior knowledge, required time or effort. Bower and Hilgard, 1981; Cohen & Levinthal, 1990 Paradox of expertise Experts sometimes find it difficult to articulate their knowledge or rephrase their insights in a way that a non-experts can understand. Sometimes experts indicate other rules than they actually apply. Johnson, 1983 Ingroup outgroup behavior We tend to interact more with likewise groups than with others thus reducing our changes to acquire radically new knowledge. Blau, 1977 Task closure Straub & Karahanna, 1998; Meyer, 1962 In our communication ,we may choose to use a one way communication medium because it permits us to close an open task without having to have a conversation. Thus leaner communi-cation channels are used than may be necessary. In other words: We tend to want to close a communication pro-cess in order to complete a task. Knowledge Communication Problems

40. Set-up to fail syndrome Managers are projecting their initial expectation of an expert’s likely performance unto him/her, leading to the self-fulfilling prophecy of (at times) lower performance. This is aggravated by de-motivating feedback to the expert. Manzoni and Barsoux, 2002 ASK problem Anomalous State of Knowledge: when a decision maker does not have the knowledge base to really know what to ask for. People need to know quite a bit about a topic to be able to ask or search for relevant information. Belkin, 1980 ; Chen et al., 1992 Not-Invented here syndrome Knowledge from others is sometimes rejected because it originated elsewhere. Katz & Allen, 1982 False consensus effect We assume others see situations as we do, and fail to revise our framing. Manzoni & Barsoux, 2002 Inert knowledge The knowledge that the decision maker has acquired from the expert does not come to mind when it is needed or useful for decision making or actions. The transferred knowledge is stuck in the situation where it has been acquired. Whitehead, 1929 Knowledge Communication Problems

41. Hidden profile problem You don’t know other’s background, what they know and could contribute. The only knowledge that is consequently shared is what is expected by everyone. Stasser 1992; Stasser and Stewart, 1992 Common knowledge effect The tendency of a group to focus merely on commonly shared (rather than unique) pieces of information. Gigone & Hastie, 1993 Lack of common ground Common ground refers to the manager’s and expert’s assumptions about their shared background beliefs about the world. If those assumptions are wrong or inconsistent communication becomes more difficult. Clark and Schäfer, 1989, Olson & Olson, 2000 Cassandra syndrome The decision makers do not give sufficient weight or attention to an expert’s warning because they face many other important problems. Only when the situation has deteriorated dramatically do they start taking the expert’s advice. Mikalachki, 1983 Knowledge Communication Problems