Resumen Thinking For a Living.

...

This chapter is about the possible interventions and experiments that can be taken by organizations to see if knowledge worker efficiency can be improved. Some meta-issues of knowledge work interventions along with the reasons, methods and common mistakes are also mentioned.

Key Points

The author mentions a relatively straight forward way to deal with Knowledge Workers – HSPALTA meaning Hire Smart People and Leave Them Alone. (Pg 39) A example of semiconductor company is taken up to show that the notion with companies viewing knowledge worker performance as a ‘black box’ can be removed by studying the factors affecting the performance of high performing groups when compared to the low ones. (Pg 41) The author sites some new observational techniques like forms of ethnography or corporate anthropology to understand the so-called invisible knowledge work processes. (Pg 42)

On the earlier methods meant to improve performance, a reference is made to Frederick Taylor’s work in the 1880 – Scientific management to improve worker efficiency in the industrial age. The method caused unwanted ‘class wars’ within the society due to the demarcations it created. (Pg 45) On the topic of Knowledge Worker Productivity, the author states that this classical term is not applicable to Knowledge work. A reference is made to Charles Leadbeater’s quote to underline the output of knowledge work Most people in most advanced economies produce nothing that can be weighed: communications, software, advertising, financial services. They trade, write, design, talk, spin and create: rarely do they make anything. The assets they work with are just ephemeral as their output. Author suggests alternate terms like Performance and Results instead of using Productivity. (Pg 47)

Some practical issues in measuring knowledge worker performance are raised and also some ineffective methods used by organizations to measure performance are also mentioned. One example is to measure the number of lines written by a programmer which is ineffectual. Few alternate methods such as Peer group reviews and multiple peer evaluations are provided with intent of measuring both quality and quantity. (Pg 49) Few output measures are suggested 1.) The volume of knowledge produced 2.) The quality of the decisions or actions taken on the basis of knowledge and 3.) The impact of knowledge produced (as judged by others). IT industry came up with its Capability Maturity Model (CMM) that measures the quality of software engineering. This has meant the IT work could be outsourced as the outsourced company can assure quality for its products with appropriate CMM certificates. (Pg 50-52)

The failed case of Business Process Re-engineering is taken. It was due to its top-down re-engineering method and also because it is of prescriptive nature that seldom works with knowledge workers. The new process change that the companies wish to bring should be based on Representational Democracy where Knowledge workers are made a part of the change process. Other failed methods are scripting, treating all knowledge workers in the same way and a blind computerization of processes (Pg 53-54) A company that is shown as a paradigm of Disciplined Experimentation is Capital One, with its series of projects involving ‘Productivity and Knowledge Management’

Personal Critique

The author sounds a bit clichéd when he says knowledge based products can be made affordable by improving knowledge worker productivity as I think product price range and employee actualization should be distinct and not interdependent. Some facts are outdated when he says very little knowledge work has been outsourced which is quite contrary to current day where all of knowledge work is outsourced to Asia.

Chapter 4 – Knowledge Work Processes

Summary

In this chapter, the author talks about some process oriented approaches to improve knowledge work, so as to create an environment where innovation and discipline can co-exist.

Key Points

The chapter starts off with an excellent explanation of process. Quoting the author “To treat something as a process is to impose a formal structure on it-to identify its beginning, end, and intermediate steps to clarify who the customer is for it, to measure it, to take stock of how well it is currently being performed, and ultimately to improve it” (Pg 61)

The work of researcher Paul Adler is cited with respect to studying knowledge worker behavior with respect to changes in process. Adler states that “the more routine tasks in software development were rendered more efficient by standardization and formalization, leaving the non-routine tasks relatively unstructured to allow more creativity in their performance” (Pg 63)

Some thumb rules are provided on the ways to handle the different Knowledge Worker profiles mentioned in chapter 2 (Pg 65). Process recommendations are given by the type of Knowledge activity of which a staged based approach is prescribed for Knowledge creation. Examples of new drug compound process and oil exploration are given. Corning R&D’s labs follow a model called “stage gate” model applied to innovation process with freedom within each stages. Under Knowledge Application process, the importance of Knowledge Re-use is given. Three critical factors – Leadership, Asset visibility and Asset control are provided (Pg 67-72) The author explores some techniques from ‘fuzzy logic’ and ‘statistics- Quality function deployment’ and ‘conjoint analysis’ on the notion of breaking process into stages. Pg 73

The author does some introspection and realizes too much of focus on process without actual practice would be of no benefit therefore he advises an integrated approach of following process and practice for effective results. He takes a dig at process analyst tendency to do abstract analysis on every aspect. The quote “I know you think for a living. But I can think better about your work than you can” represents the attitude of process analysts aptly. (Pg 75) A warning is made in adapting process design as an engineering discipline as there is very less focus on the practical aspects in this method. When combining process and practice, six implications are given which are quite implementable. One of them is “Use the Golden Rule of Process Management. Ask yourself, Would I want to have my job analysed and redesigned on the fashion that I am doing it to others” (Pg 76-77)

Different types of process interventions are given. The prominent being ‘Participative’ so that