12. The organization of knowledge sharing

Why?

For those who still have doubts: sharing knowledge is an enormous benefit to an organization and to the sharing individuals. An organization can only be successful if it is productive with knowledge; and that assumes that it is widely available, widely used, and thereby generates new knowledge. This is of strategic importance, especially in knowledge-driven organizations.

For the owners of knowledge there are also major benefits. First of all: if you give away knowledge, you have not lost it, so that disadvantage certainly can not serve as an excuse for not sharing. By sharing information, you may receive a form of appreciation through feedback, or even a confirmation of (your) quality. You could also reap gratitude, and even respect and admiration. There is even a good chance that you will get knowledge from others in return, which means that you can build up more knowledge with less effort. An unavoidable advantage for the one sharing is that by sharing knowledge you force yourself to properly structure and formulate it. As you probably know there is a French saying: “Ce qui se consoit bien , se prononce clairement ”; by obliging you to communicate something well, you must also get it clear in your own head. And that is also a useful effect of sharing. You could therefore argue that sharing knowledge also greatly benefits one's own development, and that there are no drawbacks, because you lose nothing. Despite this logical evidence, it appears to be extremely difficult to put knowledge sharing into practice.

Problems, obstacles

If we try to understand why knowledge sharing is so difficult, we soon end up with prejudices, fears, beliefs ... Some strong obstacles are: imbalance between giving and receiving; fear of assessment and competition.

A first stumbling block is the uncertainty that you cannot convey something clearly because you do not yet understand it clearly yourself. A lack of complete understranding creates uncertainty. Moreover, if you share knowledge, it may turn out to be outdated, worthless or irrelevant. Both of these obstacles have something to do with the giver's self-confidence, but also with timing and the willingness to invest that little bit of energy that is needed to make knowledge shareable.

A major obstacle is the prejudice, or the fear that sharing knowledge will result in one-sided traffic. After all, you are never sure that you will get something in return. The feeling of being robbed is never far away. The ego reflex underlying this is fueled by competition between people. This can be the result of the cultural environment in which one functions or of the rules of the game in the organization, especially in terms of remuneration and appreciation. Of course, the potential giver's lack of self-confidence also plays a role. Someone who wants to prove himself is by definition uncertain, and easily regards colleagues as potential competitors. People who have a task-oriented personality, with less attention to relationship, will also not feel a natural reflex to share and collaborate, and will have to see many rational reasons for switching to sharing.

A possible solution

To exploit the benefits of knowledge sharing and to cope with the obstacles, a number of elements are needed. There is no guarantee of success, but there are a few factors that can contribute to it.

1-       The added value of knowledge sharing for the organization must be clear, accepted, and appreciated. The greater the involvement of knowledge of employees in the mission and strategy of the organization is, the more achievable the goal will be. An exercise in reflection with this goal in mind, is best done with the entire team involved.

2-       Sharing insight into the obstacles within the team gives each team member a self-reflection but also a kind of shared challenge. A good approach here is to let the team members discover the obstacles themselves, and then complete them if necessary and useful.

3-       Rules of the game surrounding the sharing of knowledge and offer an answer to the obstacles must be agreed upon. Possible principles in this area are ( incomplete and just as an  example):

1. Sharing knowledge is part of the job; it is not a voluntary extra.
2. Everyone shares all their knowledge at the simple request of a colleague .
3. Everyone makes his own knowledge transferable by properly structuring and documenting it .
4. The timing for this is put into a schedule, which is shared with colleagues .
5. Anyone using knowledge from others always mentions the source in a correct and complete way .
6. Those who do not respect these rules will be confronted by colleagues.

             g. Everyone can withdraw from the agreements, knowing that it is either all in  or all out (possibly exclusion from the organization).

8. Non-respect of these rules is announced throughout the team.
9. Those who repeatedly fail to respect these rules are excluded.
10. Exclusions are made public, also outside the team.
11. These rules are agreed by all involved, and if necessary a formal written commitment is given.

The Start

To realize this approach, it is of course insufficient to communicate these insights and working methods in writing. Sound leadership is needed to take a focused initiative in this regard and to include all the people who are involved in the necessary consultation. Professional decision-making is necessary, whereby a vote must be considered insufficient. Moreover, not only the entire team will have to be actively involved in the follow-up, but a leadership will be needed that, in event of failure,  will ensure the necessary communication. It goes without saying that this means that in some cases, people will have to be put under a little pressure. Strong coaching seems appropriate. In order to guarantee the necessary continuity after a possible start, good coaching leadership will have to be permanently available. Personal obstacles must be discussable. The decision always rests with the employee involved, but he/she must accept all the consequences. A respectful focus must remove the lack of obligation to develop professional attitudes (team culture).

Hugo Der Kinderen