Por Arno Boersma

Uma aproximação award-winning da gerência do conhecimento complementa medidas legais para a proteção da propriedade intelectual

Como podem as companhias sustentar sua vantagem do competidor do conhecimento ao bater no potencial do mercado chinês? Como podem desenvolver, compartilhar, aplicar e proteger de seu conhecimento todo ao mesmo tempo na arena chinesa? E, apesar do fato que a maioria de conhecimento não pode legalmente ser protegido, como podem proteger seu conhecimento de qualquer maneira?

A empresa Squarewise da gerência do conhecimento desenvolveu uma aproximação por que as companhias podem ter o mais melhor de ambos os mundos: sustentando sua vantagem do competidor do conhecimento e batê-la nas vantagens do mercado chinês. Estes programas so-called de transferência do conhecimento começam onde as medidas legais terminam. Não são específicos a China e são relevantes para toda a organização que necessitar compartilhar através das beiras. Um tal projeto, executado para Philips, foi concedido o prêmio para o mais melhor projeto do consultancy nos Países Baixos pelo ROA, conselho holandês para empresa do Consultancy da gerência.

China não pode ser ignorada
Se as companhias estão envolvidas com a China ou não, não podem ignorar o impacto que tem e terá em seu negócio. A oportunidade de alcançar o mercado emergente low-cost, grande vai hand-in-hand com costurar produtos para encontrar-se com necessidades locais. Isto significa o R&D conduzindo localmente, mais perto do cliente. Em um exame pela unidade de inteligência do economista em 2004 entre executivos ocidentais, 39% indicou que China era o país da escolha para gastar a maioria de seus investimentos do R&D nos três anos seguintes (fora de seu mercado doméstico). A imagem de China está deslocando claramente do trabalho barato a um barato - mas esperto - de cérebros. But in the same survey, 38% of the western executives cite intellectual property protection as their most critical challenge. Since China became a member of the WTO in 2001, more regulations have been put in place, but at a lower level of jurisdiction they are not always enforced. Chinese regulators are working hard to catch up.

In research done by Squarewise amongst western companies in China, it was found that most companies apply a defensive, legal approach to knowledge
management issues in the country (“knowledge” in this sense is more than intellectual property and includes various other terms, such as intellectual capital, technology, tacit knowledge, trade secrets, competencies and experience). However, knowledge transfer and protection is and should be a strategic issue, not merely a responsibility of the legal department, as many companies would have you believe. There are four main reasons why legal measures alone are not sufficient:

• Knowledge can be (too) tacit and cannot be captured.
• Infringements of patents are not always visible, as is the case with process knowledge. In these cases patents become manuals for others to use the knowledge.
• Legal protection is not always respected at lower government levels.
• Turnover of employees means leakage of knowledge.

A conscious policy and structured process of knowledge transfer is needed to benefit from the opportunities in China without losing the knowledge advantage. This process is the core of the Knowledge Transfer Programmes of Squarewise and consists of three important steps: Knowledge Assessment; Knowledge Transfer; and Knowledge Awareness.

Knowledge assessment
First of all, it is essential to be able to apply an objective assessment of the company’s knowledge, whether it can be protected by legal means such as patents, or not. This means a categorisation of knowledge based on estimating sustainable value to the company, but also to the market. This approach – executed by higher management – will determine what goes beyond the companies walls. The categorisation of the knowledge is based on: (1) the position of the knowledge in relation to the market; and (2) the contribution of the knowledge to the turnover of the company.

If for some reason the categorisation above cannot be carried out – knowledge is too complex, issues are too political – a Knowledge Valuation Model can be applied as part of the Knowledge Assessment. This model has been developed to collect the aggregated, subjective opinions of managers in different regions and departments who have different views on the value of the knowledge. For example, a commercial director in China may be more inclined to share knowledge with external suppliers to enable timely delivery to end-customers, while the R&D manager in the US will be much more reserved.

The Knowledge Valuation Model objectifies the subjective perspective of knowledge by a representative group of managers. In short, these managers rate the knowledge according to five important business drivers:

1. The Strategic Intent, which determines the degree to which the knowledge affects the business strategy.
2. The Expiration Date, which determines how long the knowledge will continue to add value to the company’s business.
3. The Competitive Effect, which determines the degree to which the knowledge could strengthen competition.
4. The Differentiation Value, which determines the degree to which the knowledge contributes to market perceptions of the company.
5. The Probability of Use, which determines the degree to which the knowledge will be applied by competitors when acquired.

Consequently, the aggregated scores of these five drivers by the different managers lead to a Knowledge Transfer Profile, a percentage that indicates whether knowledge transfer is desirable or not: the higher the score, the higher the risk and the greater the consequences in case of knowledge leakage after transfer. The apparent cost incentive may appear in a different light when compared to the impact the knowledge leakage will have on the company.

Knowledge transfer
Where the first step focuses on what to share, the second focuses on with whom. This concerns an analysis of the recipient of the knowledge, usually concerning the more critical types of knowledge as derived from the first step, which are important to the company for different reasons. The categorisation of the recipient is based on: (1) the type or structure of relationship; and (2) the degree to which knowledge can be deemed safe with the recipient. This second element concerns IP rights, human resources and technology measures in place at the receiving end. Based on this assessment, the degree of knowledge sharing is determined.

Knowledge awareness
Whereas the first two steps are especially important for management levels, the Knowledge Awareness step addresses a more operational level. It is essential that the employees are made aware of the value of knowledge so that they can responsibly transfer it (or not, as is often preferred). This step involves deployment of the knowledge transfer policies at a local level and in links beyond the organisation, such as communication channels with third parties. This also includes retention of people and the loyalty to the company. For the third building block a Triple A Model has been developed for responsible knowledge transfer. It consists of three elements for better valuing, sharing, applying and protecting the
knowledge of the company:

• Knowledge awareness is the structural, organisational consciousness of the value of knowledge and the corresponding risks when it is lost. This involves, but is not limited to, a collective knowledge ambition, a common knowledge language. Examples are knowing how to categorise knowledge and recipients, as explained in previous steps, and recognising the potential threat and opportunity of being part of an external network.
• Knowledge alertness addresses the proactive management and anticipation of knowledge protection. This involves adhering to the regular contractual obligations (non-disclosure agreements, IP) and commitment to the Knowledge Transfer Policy. Examples are attention paid to the topic throughout the everyday working experience becoming second nature, and employees involved and stimulated throughout to take a proactive stance to prevent knowledge leakage.
• Knowledge accountability concerns the evaluation and rewards procedures through which stakeholders are held responsible and accountable for knowledge awareness and alertness. These can be integrated into the competency profiles of employees. Examples are regular checks throughout the employee’s sphere of influence to counter the risk of knowledge leakage and knowledge transfer issues that are part of the evaluation process.

Deliverables of a Knowledge Transfer Programme
Taken together, the three steps of the Knowledge Transfer Programme can and do lead to the following deliverables for companies:
• Less knowledge leakage – A coherent Knowledge Transfer Programme and a higher knowledge awareness amongst employees leads to less knowledge leakage. Incidents of knowledge leakage can be reduced by at least 50%.
• Lower costs – as more knowledge is transferred securely it facilitates more low-cost production. The
investment in the Knowledge Transfer Programme can be returned by a factors of between five and 10.
• Faster decisions – structured processes for knowledge transfer lead to increased speed of decisions. The time lag for decisions on transferring knowledge can be reduced from months to days.
• Increased retention – the Triple A model incorporates retention stimulating measures. Retention of key employees can be doubled within one year.
• More learning – the structured, objective approach for knowledge transfer includes feedback and learning loops. Cases of knowledge transfer and their consequences are thus captured for future use.

Arno Boersma, Squarewise

Arno Boersma is a partner at Squarewise
Squarewise is a strategy firm for knowledge and innovation management. Through proven, best practices the firm supports multinational firms and government entities in better developing, sharing, applying and protecting their knowledge advantage.