2
Strategic Analysis of an Organization's Knowledge Capital

2.1. Articulation of Chapter 2

The purpose of this chapter is to conceptually and practically explore the first stage of the knowledge management (KM) virtuous circle described in Chapter 1, which is dedicated to the strategic analysis of an organization's knowledge capital. In section 2.2, we recall the main concepts of this strategic analysis.

The practical exploration of strategic knowledge analysis will then be carried out through case studies of Chronopost (section 2.3), Hydro-Québec (section 2.4), the IPEN's Radiopharmacy Center (section 2.5) and Sonatrach (section 2.6).

Section 2.7 summarizes the lessons learned from these four case studies on the strategic analysis of an organization's knowledge capital.

2.2. Introduction to the strategic analysis of knowledge capital

This section is a summary of the strategic analysis of knowledge capital presented in [ERM 18a].

The knowledge capital strategic analysis approach is an audit of the company's knowledge in order to create a KM action plan to manage this said capital.

This audit is carried out in four stages:

• - critical capacity analysis;
• - critical knowledge analysis;
• - strategic alignment;
• - development of an action plan.

The analysis of knowledge capital is based on the representation, by actors, of the objectives of their unit and that of the knowledge available in that unit. The choice of representation mode is that of mapping. Mapping is an abstract process that involves selection, classification, simplification and symbolization. In the analysis of knowledge capital, we will use two maps: the objective map and the knowledge domain map (or knowledge map). A more detailed description of the representation of the mapping of critical knowledge domains is provided in [AUB 03].

2.2.1. Step 1: analysis of critical capacities

Critical capacity analysis consists of identifying and qualifying the capacities required by the company to carry out its missions and achieve its operational objectives.

The missions are formulated in the form of objectives to be achieved for the organization and represented in the form of an objective map, consisting of a tree of strategic axes, objectives and sub-objectives, with a limited number of axes (generally four to six). The next phase consists of identifying and qualifying the capacities required by the company to achieve the capacities present in the map. Each of the identified capacities is qualitatively assessed by its criticality level (is this capacity very critical, moderately critical or non-critical?) based, for example, on the themes of the CKF (Critical Knowledge Factor) capacity grid described in section 2.2.5.

2.2.2. Step 2: analysis of critical knowledge

The analysis of critical knowledge consists of identifying and qualifying the different domains of knowledge present in the company. The first phase of knowledge criticality analysis is the construction of the knowledge domain map (or knowledge map). Some domains should first be identified. This consists, on the basis of reference documents and interviews, of bringing out knowledge domains through the successive analysis of activities, projects, products, etc. Criticality analysis is systematically carried out with a criticality grid such as the CKF grid shown as an example in section 2.2.5.

The criticality assessment of a domain consists of assigning a score according to each criterion for each domain: the more critical the domain, the higher the score.

2.2.3. Step 3: strategic alignment

The objective of this step is to compare the strategic visions developed in the first step (capacities required to achieve the objectives) and the field business visions developed in the second step (knowledge required by the business lines in their activities).

This step begins with the development of an influence matrix and the weighting of criticalities by alignment. To identify the potential influence of the strategic vision on the business vision (and vice versa), a double entry table, an "influence matrix", is constructed, in which the influences between knowledge domains and capacities are indicated. Since each domain and each capacity has a criticality score, a simple weighted average can be assigned to each element. This note is characteristic of the strategic importance and criticality of the element. The more critical a strategic capacity is, the more knowledge domains it impacts, while the more critical these areas are, the more important this strategic capacity is. Similarly, the more critical a knowledge domain is, the more strategic capacities it is concerned with, while the more critical these strategic capacities are, the greater the importance of that knowledge domain is.

Finally, knowledge domains and strategic capacities can be classified in increasing order of importance.

2.2.4. Step 4: developing the action plan

The arguments collected throughout the criticality analyses of knowledge and capacities are very rich and, in most cases, they include many suggestions and recommendations. The areas of reflection concerning the KM actions to be implemented are defined for each knowledge domain and each capacity. To give a better visibility, these different axes of the action plan can be grouped into themes:

• - organization, when it comes to managerial actions;
• - training, when the actions concern learning systems;
• - capitalization/transfer, when it comes to preservation, collection, sharing, documentation actions, etc.

2.2.5. The knowledge criticality analysis grid

The criticality of a knowledge domain is defined as an assessment of the risks/opportunities that this knowledge domain presents for the company. Criticality is identified according to criteria grouped into four thematic axes.

Table 2.1. Criticality criteria grid (CKF)

1. 1) Number and availability of holders
2. 2) Outsourcing
3. 3) Leadership
4. 4) Originality
5. 5) Confidentiality

1. 6) Adequacy with missions
2. 7) Creating value for the parties
3. 8) Emergence
4. 9) Adaptability
5. 10) Use

1. 11) Difficulty in identifying sources
2. 12) Mobilization of networks
3. 13) Tacit nature of knowledge
4. 14) Importance of tangible knowledge sources
5. 15) Obsolescence rate

1. 16) Depth
2. 17) Complexity
3. 18) Difficulty of appropriation
4. 19) History of knowledge
5. 20) Dependence on the environment

Table 2.1 provides an example of a generic grid of criticality criteria that was developed by the Club Gestion des Connaissances, called CKF (Critical Knowledge Factors). The CKF library has 20 criteria grouped into four thematic axes. Each criterion is evaluated on a level scale from 1 to 4 and represents the degree of achievement of the criterion. To facilitate analysis and scoring, the levels of each criterion are briefly described. This is a "rating description" and not a normative description. Each criterion evaluation is based on a question. Each level is expressed by a clear and concise sentence, avoiding vague and confusing terms (see an example in Figure 2.1).

Figure 2.1. An example of a criticality criterion and its rating scales

2.3. Chronopost: observing professions

This section is based on the study written by Thierno Tounkara and Jean-Louis Ermine (Études de cas - Club Gestion des Connaissances - 2010 - Internal Document).

2.3.1. Presentation of the company

Chronopost was created in 1985 as an initiative of the La Poste group, in reaction to the arrival of American integrators on the French market. As new needs appeared in companies with just-in-time development, a new market was created: that of express transport. Under the name SFMI (Société française de Messagerie Internationale), the subsidiary company of La Poste and the TAT group took its place on the market. It holds 10% of the national and international express mail market, serving France and 45 other countries. Over the years, new services have been launched and infrastructures developed. In 1992, a new corporate name appeared (Chronopost SA) and the company became a member of the GDEW (Global Delivery Express Worldwide) network, giving it access to an international network equipped with powerful air assets and information systems. It continued to expand and strengthen its positions, in particular by taking control of Taxicolis (high-stakes, personalized urgent transport) and Top Chrono (urban deliveries). It is establishing itself in Europe, Africa and the North American continent.

Since January 2007, through its...