osed k dge m gy and · ii DRDC-RDDC-2019-D034 Template in use: EO Publishing App for SR-RD-EC Eng 2018-12-19_v1 (new disclaimer).dotm Résumé Le bureau du scientifique en chef a

DefenReferenDRDC-R

May 201

PropactioDeve

Micheline Bruno GilbDRDC – V

Susan McDRDC – C

ce Resence DocumRDDC-2019

19

posed kon planelopme

Bélanger bert Valcartier Res

cIntyre Corporate Off

earch anment 9-D034

CA

knowlen for Dent Ca

search Centre

fice

nd Deve

CAN U

AN UNCLAS

edge mefencenada

e

lopment

UNCLASSIFIE

SIFIED

managee Rese

t Canad

ED

ementearch a

a

t strateand

egy andd

CAN UNCLASSIFIED

Template in use: EO Publishing App for SR-RD-EC Eng 2018-12-19_v1 (new disclaimer).dotm © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada (Department of National Defence), 2019

© Sa Majesté la Reine en droit du Canada (Ministère de la Défense nationale), 2019

CAN UNCLASSIFIED

IMPORTANT INFORMATIVE STATEMENTS

This document was reviewed for Controlled Goods by Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC) using the Schedule to the Defence Production Act.

Disclaimer: This publication was prepared by Defence Research and Development Canada an agency of the Department of National Defence. The information contained in this publication has been derived and determined through best practice and adherence to the highest standards of responsible conduct of scientific research. This information is intended for the use of the Department of National Defence, the Canadian Armed Forces (“Canada”) and Public Safety partners and, as permitted, may be shared with academia, industry, Canada’s allies, and the public (“Third Parties”). Any use by, or any reliance on or decisions made based on this publication by Third Parties, are done at their own risk and responsibility. Canada does not assume any liability for any damages or losses which may arise from any use of, or reliance on, the publication.

Endorsement statement: This publication has been published by the Editorial Office of Defence Research and Development Canada, an agency of the Department of National Defence of Canada. Inquiries can be sent to: [email protected].

DRDC-RDDC-2019-D034 i

Abstract

The Office of the Chief Scientist was tasked to investigate and recommend a strategy for Knowledge Management (KM) for Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC). A KM strategy can be developed as a KM vision and a list of KM principles that will support the implementation of this vision. Those two key elements are needed to orient the development of necessary actions while considering the organizational context and challenges. In the context of DRDC, the proposed KM vision and principles should orient DRDC implementation efforts to:

– Seek for Science & Technology (S&T) excellence through the development of its people, processes and infra/infostructures;

– Value its knowledge by making it available and easily findable;

– Empower the “need to share” to enable those that “need to know”; and

– Manage the DRDC knowledge to facilitate its exploitation by those that need it.

Based on discussions with DRDC staff and management, KM challenges were identified. A literature review was conducted to identify recent advancements in the KM area as well as the KM approach taken by other organizations. This knowledge was used to develop a KM vision and principles for DRDC, as well as to propose eight (8) KM goals. A roadmap including an action plan for its application has also been developed.

Significance to defence and security

The “raison d’être” of DRDC is to provide knowledge and technology advantage to support defence and security operations at home and abroad which reinforce the importance of managing our knowledge for the success of our organization. The KM strategy proposed in this Reference Document will enable DRDC to better achieve its role in line with the new Canadian Defence Policy “Strong, Secure, Engaged” for the benefit of the Department of National Defence, the Canadian Armed Forces and the public security community.

ii DRDC-RDDC-2019-D034 Template in use: EO Publishing App for SR-RD-EC Eng 2018-12-19_v1 (new disclaimer).dotm

Résumé

Le bureau du scientifique en chef a été mandaté pour examiner et recommander une stratégie de la gestion de la connaissance (GC) pour Recherche et développement pour la défense Canada (RDDC). Une stratégie de GC peut être développée en une vision et un ensemble de principes supportant la mise en oeuvre de cette vision. Ces deux éléments clés sont nécessaires pour orienter le développement des actions nécessaires tout en considérant le contexte et les défis organisationnels. Dans le contexte de RDDC, la vision et les principes proposés devraient orienter les efforts de mise en oeuvre à :

– Rechercher l’excellence en sciences et technologie à travers le développement des gens, des processus et des infrastructures (physiques et informationnelles);

– Valoriser sa connaissance en la rendant disponible et facilement trouvable;

– Habiliter le concept « besoin de partager » afin de mieux supporter ceux qui ont « besoin de savoir »;

– Gérer la connaissance de RDDC afin de faciliter son exploitation par ceux qui en ont besoin.

Suite à des discussions avec le personnel et les gestionnaires de RDDC, les défis reliés à la GC à RDDC ont été identifiés. Une revue de la littérature a permis d’identifier les avancées récentes dans le domaine de la GC ainsi que les approches de GC qui sont utilisées par d’autres organisations. Cette connaissance a été utilisée pour développer et proposer une vision, des principes ainsi que huit objectifs de GC pour RDDC. Une feuille de route incluant un plan d’action pour son application a également été développé.

Importance pour la défense et la sécurité

La raison d’être de RDDC, étant de fournir les connaissances et les technologies nécessaires pour défendre et protéger les intérêts du Canada au pays et à l’étranger, vient amplifier l’importance de la GC pour le succès de notre organisation. La stratégie de GC proposée dans ce document de référence va permettre à RDDC de mieux réaliser son rôle tel que décrit dans la nouvelle politique de la défense canadienne « Protection, Sécurité, Engagement » pour le bénéfice du département de la Défense nationale, les Forces armées canadiennes et la communauté de la sécurité publique.

DRDC-RDDC-2019-D034 iii

Table of contents

Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i

Significance to defence and security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i

Résumé . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii

Importance pour la défense et la sécurité . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii

Table of contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii

List of figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

List of tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi

Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.1 Background information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2 Report structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

2 Knowledge management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.1 Knowledge management trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

2.1.1 KM assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 2.1.2 KM challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.1.3 KM and innovation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.1.4 KM in the S&T organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.1.5 KM strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

2.2 KM in other organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.3 Impact of millennials’ departure on KM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

3 The state of DRDC’s KM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 3.1 Previous KM efforts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 3.2 DRDC KM challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 3.3 DRDC’s KM framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

3.3.1 Stakeholders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 3.3.2 Business processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 3.3.3 Critical knowledge areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 3.3.4 Repositories of knowledge assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 3.3.5 Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

4 A proposed KM strategy for DRDC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 4.1 Strategic considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

4.1.1 DRDC value, vision, mission, objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 4.1.2 DRDC KM Journey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

4.2 A KM vision for DRDC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 4.3 KM principles for DRDC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 4.4 Proposed DRDC KM goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 4.5 Risk management strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

iv DRDC-RDDC-2019-D034 Template in use: EO Publishing App for SR-RD-EC Eng 2018-12-19_v1 (new disclaimer).dotm

4.6 KM strategy assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

5 Proposed DRDC KM roadmap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 5.1 Change management framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 5.2 KM integrated action roadmap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

5.2.1 KM Goal 1—Know what we know . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 5.2.2 KM Goal 2—Capture critical knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 5.2.3 KM Goal 3—Preserve critical knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 5.2.4 KM Goal 4—Organize and retrieve knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 5.2.5 KM Goal 5—Foster smarter sharing and collaboration within and with others . . 43 5.2.6 KM Goal 6—Facilitate use and reuse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 5.2.7 KM Goal 7—Collective responsibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 5.2.8 KM Goal 8—Collective governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

5.3 Next steps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

6 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

Annex A DRDC S&T capability taxonomy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

Annex B Assessment of the KM initiatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

List of symbols/abbreviations/acronyms/initialisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

DRDC-RDDC-2019-D034 v

List of figures

Figure 1: DIK pyramid. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Figure 2: Generic KM framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Figure 3: Knowledge transfer/exchange spectrum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Figure 4: GoC IM guiding principles [29]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Figure 5: Perceived DRDC KM challenges. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Figure 6: Proposed DRDC KM framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Figure 7:

Figure 8: KM initiatives overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1

Proposed KM lines of effort. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

vi DRDC-RDDC-2019-D034 Template in use: EO Publishing App for SR-RD-EC Eng 2018-12-19_v1 (new disclaimer).dotm

List of tables

Table 1: KM activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Table 2: Template for the assessment of KM initiatives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

DRDC-RDDC-2019-D034 vii

Acknowledgements

This work could not have been achieved without the inputs of numerous DRDC colleagues that took the time to share their vision and KM challenges, namely:

– Andrew Vallerand

– Barbara Waruszynski

– Benoit Ricard

– Cam Boulet

– Chris McMillan

– Christian Laverdière

– Claude Roy

– David Maybury

– Debbie Blakeney

– Diane Sarazin

– Gary Geling

– Guy Turcotte

– Guy Vézina

– Janin Huard

– Jeff Secker

– Johanne Charest

– John Osler

– Lauchie Scott

– Léonie Bernier

– Luc Pigeon

– Marc Lauzon

– Marc Roy

– Mathieu Leprohon

– Marta Farsang

– Michel Ducharme

– Nathalie Harrison

– Nezih Mrad

– Paul Comeau

viii DRDC-RDDC-2019-D034 Template in use: EO Publishing App for SR-RD-EC Eng 2018-12-19_v1 (new disclaimer).dotm

– Rachel Heide

– Ramin Sabry

– Rebecca Atkinson

– Sophie Paquet

– Ron Poirier

– Susan Hurst

– Sandra Schneider

– Régine Lecocq

– Réjean Lebrun

– Stéphane Paradis

– Thierry Gongora

– Valérie Lavigne

The authors also want to thank former DRDC employees as well as partners that did not hesitate to share their experience related to the important subject of managing the knowledge of an organization.

– Claude Guimond (Hydro-Québec)

– Denis Poussard (Former DRDC / Université Laval)

– John Carney (Defence Science and Technology Laboratory)

– John Verdnon (Former DRDC)

– Marianne Huard (Former DRDC)

– Pierre Galarneau (Institut national d’optique)

– Robert Mertens (Former DRDC)

It is important to acknowledge the members of the Council for Information and Knowledge Management, which created exceptional opportunities to exchange knowledge management good practices and lessons learned.

– Amanda Pelkola (Council on Information and Knowledge Management)

– Annie Leclerc (Office of the Auditor General of Canada)

– Beverly Kaye Riem (Ernst & Young)

– Blacke Melnick (Knowledge Management Institute of Canada)

– Brian Dawson (Canada Science and Technology Museum Corporation)

– Candis Emery (Bank of Canada)

– Carmen Bohn (Federation of Canadian Municipalities)

– Carole Marti (Hydro-Québec)

– Charles Lee (Automotive Fuel Cell Cooperation Corporation)

DRDC-RDDC-2019-D034 ix

– Christine McAllister (Canadian Payments Association)

– Dale Arseneault (Bank of Canada)

– Dana Tessier (Shopify Inc.)

– Emily Maddocks (The Conference Board of Canada)

– Fiona Smith Hale (Canada Science and Technology Museums Corporation)

– Joanne Burelle (Canada Science and Technology Museum Corporation)

– Kathleen O’Connell (National Research Council)

– Kerry-Leigh Burchill (Canada Science and Technology Museum Corporation)

– Laurent Simon (HEC Montreal)

– Lauren Hunter (Natural Resources Canada)

– Lisa Spinks (Alberta Innovates – Energy and Environment Solutions)

– Liz Marasse (Payments Canada)

– Louis Lazure (Institute de recherché Robert-Sauvé en santé et sécurité du travail)

– Marianne Fotia (Conference Board of Canada)

– Mariana Catz (Ontario Trillium Foundation)

– Marie-Eve Côté (Centre de services partagés)

– Max Evans (McGill University)

– Messaouda Ouerd (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada)

– Michael Lenczner (Ontario Trillium Foundation)

– Pascal Lavoie (Federation of Canadian Municipalities)

– Susan Ross (Office of the Auditor General of Canada)

– Sarah Sedgman (Kinaxis Inc.)

– Yeona Jang ( McGill University)

It is also important to mention that the first assessment of the different initiatives proposed in this Reference Document would not have been possible without the contribution of:

– Susan Hurst

– Mathieu Leprohon

– Sandra Schneider

Finally, our thanks go to all of our colleagues, locally, nationally or internationally, who provided inspiration through opportunistic informal discussions.

x DRDC-RDDC-2019-D034 Template in use: EO Publishing App for SR-RD-EC Eng 2018-12-19_v1 (new disclaimer).dotm

This page intentionally left blank.

DRDC-RDDC-2019-D034 1

1 Introduction

Knowledge Management (KM) is widely recognized as an essential function in all enterprises since it encompasses one of the most fundamental resources of any organization: its knowledge. One can easily see that no organization, whatever its mandate or role, can function without a robust knowledge base gathered and nurtured by its employees. It is becoming all the more important in the blooming knowledge economy where the key asset for many organizations is the know-how developed by its employees, not necessarily its infrastructure. The exponential growth in data generation created by the pervasiveness of computer-based systems and the availability of networks has significantly accentuated the importance of KM over the last decade.

As a Science and Technology (S&T) organization, Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC) has been aware of the importance of managing its knowledge well for decades. Besides, the DRDC 2013 S&T Strategy identifies knowledge management as “an enabler to provide trusted access to S&T knowledge, expertise and know-how, wherever it exists, and to deliver these in a timely fashion for maximum impact” [1]. More recently, the Open Government initiative put the emphasis on the Government of Canada (GoC) intent to “… maximize access to federally funded scientific research to encourage greater collaboration and engagement with the scientific community, the private sector, and the public” [2]. This is clear evidence of the GoC aim to better manage the knowledge created or enabled by federal entities and ensure that it produces an optimum valued-added for Canadians.

Considering the need to continuously improve its tools and processes to better deliver its S&T products, DRDC has invested some noticeable efforts throughout the last 20 years to better understand the gaps and challenges associated with the management of S&T knowledge, especially in the context of defence and security. In particular, one can note the Department of National Defence’s (DND) Assistant Deputy Minister (Review Services) January 2015 evaluation of S&T which recommended that it: “Implement a management structure that ensures coordination of activities across the Defence S&T program, including resource sharing and management, and promotion of external partnerships.” These elements combined led to the decision to develop a KM strategy specifically for DRDC that would focus and drive future efforts in a sensitive and realistic way. A mandate was then developed within the Chief of Staff organization to propose, based on the previous work, a realistic KM strategy that could be adapted to the particular context of DRDC.

Consequently, this Reference Document aims at proposing a KM strategy adapted for DRDC needs while documenting the course of the analysis that led to it. It does not pretend to be the one and only way for a KM strategy, but since it is based on a broad analysis of the KM approaches, within and outside government, combined with a review of previous work, it provides a cornerstone where the team responsible for its implementation could start building and developing sound and effective tools and processes.

1.1 Background information

First, it is important to understand what KM is really about. KM is about ensuring that the right people have access to the right knowledge, with the right skills to make timely and well-informed decisions. It is an organizational capability consisting of strategies and processes designed to

2 DRDC-RDDC-2019-D034 Template in use: EO Publishing App for SR-RD-EC Eng 2018-12-19_v1 (new disclaimer).dotm

identify, capture, structure, value, leverage, and share an organization’s intellectual assets to enhance its performance and competitiveness. It is associated with the management of knowledge assets, also called knowledge capital, which refers to the accumulated intellectual resources of the organization. It could be defined as the knowledge possessed by an organization and its workforce in the form of information, ideas, learning, understanding, memory, insights, cognitive and technical skills, and capabilities. The workforce, databases, documents, guides, policies and procedures, software, and patents are repositories of an organization’s knowledge assets. The identification of the organizational strategic knowledge assets (core competencies, areas of expertise, intellectual property, and deep pools of talent) and their management are key to the success of an organization.

Knowledge is usually classified into two (2) main categories: explicit (knowledge that is formalized and codified: the know-what); and tacit (knowledge that is intuitive, largely based on experience, hard to define: the know-how). Tacit knowledge is closely related to behavioural output. Lu and Lee found that tacit and explicit knowledge are complementary rather than mutually exclusive [3]. While routine tasks benefit most from explicit knowledge describing specific job instructions, complex tasks requiring judgment and creativity tend to mostly benefit from accumulation of tacit knowledge. Embedded knowledge is a third category that is sometimes used for the knowledge that exists in explicit sources (such as rules, processes, manuals, culture, routines, code of conduct, ethics, artefacts, products or structures), but not being explicit by itself [4]. Embedded knowledge is included in the structure, organizational culture and processes, often related to organizational memory, which mainly consists of the accumulated information regarding past decisions.

Since knowledge is considered a strategic asset by most organizations (particularly in the public sector), it is anticipated that good management of this knowledge will lead to benefits such as [5]:

– Enhanced strategic decision-making;

– Better-informed policy;

– More cost-effective services;

– Engagement of citizens and stakeholders in new and better ways;

– Innovation;

– Reduced redundancy for routine tasks;

– Better knowledge flows across organizational boundaries;

– Enhanced transfer and protection of corporate memory;

– Improved employee engagement; and

– Better quality of information and services provided to citizens.

From a holistic perspective, knowledge management contributes to the improvement of efficiency, effectiveness, creativity and empowerment [6]. To be fully effective, it must directly benefit the individual (i.e., facilitate the work to be done) and the organizational (i.e., contribute to the success of the organization) perspectives.

DRDC

A comconfuis an e

Essenat thejust insuppobuildiindiviWhileinformNonetdata a

The dconfuwell-k

–

–

–

–

Underimproare nmanaghumahas beof act

C-RDDC-2019

mmon mistakusing informatenabler of inf

ntially, inform right time. Onformation, bort and effectiing communiiduals, rather e knowledge mation managtheless, to be

and informatio

distinction bused. An intuknown Data /

Data: Pure an

Information:significance;

Knowledge:

Wisdom: Thvalues within

rstanding theove knowledgeeded to idegement of itsn and materieen taken to tions that coul

9-D034

e is mixing uption managemformation man

mation managOn the other hbut insights, give action. Knities than conthan electronmanagement

gement covere effective, knon manageme

etween data,uitive way to/ Information

nd simple fac

Structured ;

The ability to

he capacity to n a larger con

e nuances betge managemeentify the keys knowledge ial resources. develop a prold lead to the

p informationment with knonagement wh

ement is the hand, knowleguidance, expnowledge mannnecting comnic media, knt includes prors processes nowledge maent.

, informationo represent th

/ Knowledge

cts with no pa

data which

o use informa

exploit the kntext.

Figure

tween these fnt within an y problems oin consideratTherefore, th

oposed KM Simplementati

n managemenowledge manahich is an enab

provision of edge managemperience and nagement is m

mputers and bnowledge is aocesses involinvolving exp

anagement ne

n, and knowhe distinction (DIK) pyram

articular organ

brings addi

ation strategic

knowledge to

1: DIK pyram

four conceptsorganization.of each partiion of its mahis ReferenceStrategy for Dion of the rec

nt with informagement. In fbler of knowl

the right infoment goes beknow-how, f

much more abbuilding databa lot harder tolving both explicit knowle

eeds to be bui

wledge is anon between thmid [7] (Figur

nization, the b

itional mean

cally to achiev

choose objec

mid.

s is a fundam However, fuicular organi

andate and bue Document dDRDC and sucommended st

mation technofact, informatiledge manage

ormation to thyond this, anfor the purpo

about connectibases. As mao manage thaxplicit and tacedge as knowilt on a found

other aspect ese elementsre 1):

basic atoms o

ning, data in

ve one’s objec

ctives, consist

mental step inurther thoughization with usiness procesdescribes theuggests a potetrategy.

logy as well aion technologement.

he right peopnd provides noose of decisioing people anainly stored ian informationcit knowledg

wledge objectdation of goo

that is oftes is to use th

f information

n context an

ctive; and

tent with one

n the course tts and analysrespect to thsses as well a

e approach thential roadma

3

as gy

le ot on nd in n.

ge, ts. od

en he

n;

nd

’s

to sis he as

hat ap


1.2 Report structure

Following the KM introduction presented in the Chapter 1, the Chapter 2 describes the current trends and challenges associated with KM. In addition to the imperatives that led DRDC to dedicate its efforts to this topic over the years, the Chapter 3 presents the current KM challenges faced by DRDC as well as a KM framework identifying the key factors that can support the development of a KM strategy within our organization. A KM strategy adapted to DRDC’s needs is proposed and substantiated in Chapter 4; while a roadmap, including an action plan, for its application is suggested in the Chapter 5. Finally, the work is summarized in the Chapter 6.

DRDC

2

2.1

A comsuppothe imwhichNonak

–

–

–

–

A knoare crFigurealreadShearorgan

C-RDDC-2019

Knowl

Knowl

mprehensive orting the devmportance of h relate to ka & Takeuch

Socializationguidance, imorganization

Externalizatidocuments, mdesign of datto be part omechanisms relevant for o

Combinationmanuals) arereview reporare examples

Internalizatioknowledge se.g., as in tra

owledge framrucial for thee 2 puts intody exist or norer [11] as anization such a

9-D034

ledge m

ledge ma

literature revvelopment of understandinthe type o

hi as below:

n/personalizatmitation, and

strategy focu

ion/codificatiomanuals, etc. tabases, docuf this strategsuch as met

organizations

n (from exple combined tort, trend analys of combinat

on (from explsources, whicaining courses

mework can be organizatio

o perspective ot, and may ba theoretical as DRDC wo

anagem

anagemen

view was cona KM strateg

ng four basic of knowledge

tion (from tacobservation

usses on gene

on (from tacso that it can

ument managegy. Since tacitaphors might requiring the

icit to explico create new ysis or summtion.

licit to tacit):h lead to thes [8].

Figure 2: Ge

be used to ideon. For exam

the knowledbe owned bybasis, it is

uld include:

ment

nt trends

nducted that gy within an ostrategies fore (tacit and

cit to tacit): K[8]. The pe

rating new so

cit to explicn spread moreement, and wit knowledget have to be e reuse of exis

cit): Codifiedknowledge [

mary as well a

This relates modification

eneric KM fra

entify the diffmple, the gendge activities y us or not. U

expected tha

s

led to the deorganization. r managing knd explicit),

Knowledge is ersonalizationolutions or pro

cit): Tacit kne easily througworkflow mane may be ver

used. The costing knowled

d knowledge 8]. Synthesis

as organizing

to the use ofn of the user’

amework.

ferent types oneric KM fra

related to thUsing the KMat the KM a

efinition of tThe review c

nowledge. Thhave been

passed on thrn strategy is oduct innovat

nowledge is gh the organiznagement canry difficult toodification stdge [9].

sources (e.gs of explicit k

content into

f and learning’s existing tac

of knowledgeamework [10he fact that knM model of Bactivities imp

the key factoclearly showehese strategie

described b

rough practickey when thtions [9].

codified intzation [8]. Th

n be considereo codify, othetrategy is ver

g., documentknowledge intnew database

g from expliccit knowledg

e activities th] presented inowledge maBouthillier anportant for a

5

rs ed es, by

ce, he

to he ed er ry

ts, to es

cit ge,

hat in ay nd an


Table 1: KM activities.

Identification of knowledge needs An organization has to be able to identify the knowledge required to operate.

Discovery of existing knowledge An organization needs to be able to find existing knowledge that applies to a situation.

Acquisition of knowledge An organization needs to be able to elicit knowledge from existing sources (e.g., domain experts, documents, large databases).

Creation of new knowledge When knowledge required to accomplish the work does not exist, an organization needs to be able to create new knowledge.

Storage and organization of knowledge

Existing knowledge needs to be organized and store in order to be easily consulted.

Sharing of knowledge It is recognized that the sharing of knowledge increases the social interaction in the workplace, leading to a team productivity rise.

Use and application of knowledge The knowledge of an organization is at the core of its “raison d’être”; it is what makes it different from other similar organizations. Accordingly, it is essential that this knowledge is being used/applied in the operations in an appropriate manner.

Knowledge retention Since the knowledge of an organization is at the core of its operations, it needs to be retained in the organization, even when people have to leave the organization.

Knowledge sustainment Considering that knowledge is a critical asset of the organization, it is important to keep it up-to-date, otherwise it will not be relevant anymore.

Knowledge disposal Considering that some type of knowledge may be perishable, it is required to have mechanisms in place to timely dispose the knowledge (considering its sensitivity).

Knowledge asset assessment Not all knowledge assets have the same importance nor the same value to the organization. In order to use and manage each knowledge asset appropriately according to the different organizational constraints, it is important to be able to assess the quality as well as the value of each knowledge asset.

KM process assessment In order to determine if the knowledge is being managed correctly, it is important to assess the KM management process of an organization.

The literature stresses that KM practises need to be contextually appropriate, engaging and flexible. In fact, there is no one size that fits all approaches [12]. Fataneh Zarinpoudh, Shirley Von Sychowski and Julie Sperling have identified that the number of people to reach (level of outreach required) as well as the level of interaction need to be considered (Figure 3 depicts the relationship between these elements and KM activities to be performed) [13]. This is in line with the findings of Jonas Roth. In his work to enable knowledge creation, he found that [14]:

– Knowledge transfer systems need to appropriately “fit” the kind of knowledge and task they are intended for;

DRDC

–

–

More knowenablesucceframeapplie

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

C-RDDC-2019

The receivinknowledge is

Different meselection of knowledge a

recently, wledge culturees and motivass of the orga

ework for deved to improve

Leadership: E

Evangelizati

Infrastructur

Physical env

Recognition

Collaboration

Optimization

Knowledge a

Time allocat

Organization

9-D034

ng team hass required a p

ethods need tothe method

and the type o

Figure 3

work has beee. Knowledgeates people toanization” [1veloping knowe KM in organ

Employee em

on: Commun

e: Knowledge

vironments: Sh

& Long-term

n infrastructu

n of knowledg

aptitude asses

ion: Knowled

nal structure: H

s to have enpriori to absor

o be used to eused should

f complexity

3: Knowledge

en done to be culture can o create, shar5]. Stan Olivwledge culturnization such

mpowerment &

icating the KM

e portals;

hared spaces

m incentives: R

ure & sponsor

ge-intensive p

ssment: Recru

dge creation &

Hybrid struct

nough “absorb the new kn

enable differed depend onin the setting

e transfer/exc

better undersbe described

re and utilize ver and Kondare in organizaas DRDC, is

& KM leaders

M benefits;

& open doors

Reward system

rship for phys

processes for

uitment;

& sharing; and

tures with fun

orptive capacnowledge; and

ent types of kn the contextg.

change spectr

stand the did as “A wayknowledge fal Reddy Kanations. This f

s composed of

ship at all ma

s;

ms;

sical events: C

KM: Process

d

nctional & KM

city,” i.e., a d

knowledge tot, the objecti

rum.

ifferent dimey of organizafor the benefindadi [15] haframework, wf the followin

anagerial leve

Communities

s management

M roles.

minimum o

be shared, thive of sharin

ensions of thtional life thit and endurinave proposed which could bng ten factors:

els;

of practices;

t;

7

of

he ng

he hat ng

a be :


2.1.1 KM assessment

Every organization, whether experienced or new to KM, can be assessed according to a level of functional maturity of their KM processes. The different KM maturity models that have been developed comprise between five and eight levels. The American Productivity & Quality Center (APQC’s) KM maturity level [16] is one of the best-known. This model starts at level one with an organization lacking consistency in its processes and practices for the management of the knowledge. Level two corresponds to an organization developing local KM practises. At level three, an organization has common structured processes and standards for the management of its knowledge. Level four includes organizations optimizing their KM processes and procedures while Level five corresponds to organizations where KM is embedded in all of the business processes and where all the KM behaviours are related to continuous improvement of practices and are part of the organizational culture.

Different approaches can be used to determine the value of knowledge and KM processes of an organization. Irma Becerra-Fernandez and Rajiv Sabherwal have proposed to include [17]:

– Evaluating the availability of areas of knowledge relevant to the organization;

– Assessing the value an area of knowledge contributes to the organization by using:

– The amount of money required to produce the knowledge;

– The amount of money a purchaser is willing to pay for the use of the knowledge;

– The improvement of the quality of the decisions enabled by the knowledge;

– Assessing its impact on:

– People: in terms of employees learning, employee adaptability and employee job satisfaction;

– Organizational processes: in terms of efficiency, effectiveness and innovativeness;

– Organizational products: in terms of value-added products and knowledge-based products; and

– Organizational performance: in terms of direct and indirect impacts.

In a R&D organization such as DRDC, the assessment of S&T activities usually relates to the knowledge that has been created and how it has been created. It can be measured in terms of:

– Core knowledge, i.e., research outputs;

– KM activities in terms of idea generation, expression and sharing. This can be done through:

– Design review;

– Knowledge intensive staff innovation plan meeting;

– Patent review committee to support patent registration and enhance patent quality;

– Patent expo which is an informal and open system where researchers of any background are invited to share new ideas and potential problems;


– KM enablers simulating S&T activities, such as:

– Research forum which facilitates cooperation and communication with customers and partners;

– Knowledge managers to encourage KM activities and review research outputs from a knowledge perspective;

– Process rules and standards for KM activities which are applicable to everyone in the organization;

– Recognition programs for special knowledge contributions e.g., to reward new ideas; and

– IT architecture to facilitate KM activities.

2.1.2 KM challenges

While KM has been the subject of many discussions for a long time, success stories presented in the literature are limited, which may relate to the way KM has been approached so far. Coulson-Thomas argues that KM will have the most impact when focussing on the knowledge of how to do things, in particular, how to do a difficult job [18]. “It requires to shift the emphasis from knowledge for “knowing” to knowledge for “doing” [18]. Effectively, having access to information does not automatically lead to having more knowledge. Knowledge is not necessarily produced when people browse and interact instead of thinking and acting. It is of common usage that organizations load information on their intranet, or central repository, without necessarily using it [18]. Effective KM approach will change this paradigm by putting the focus on the relevance of knowledge, i.e., knowledge is that required to accomplish a task, make a decision, identify opportunities or face a particular challenge [18].

Another aspect to consider for organizations such as DRDC, is the level of complexity of problems. Effectively, the knowledge to deal with S&T problems often requires a multi-disciplinary, cross-disciplinary approach, which demands collaboration between people from different domains. However, to increase the efficiency of collaboration, organizations need to take actions to break down barriers to collaboration. Heidy Gardner has identified the following six (6) perceived barriers to collaboration [19]:

– Lack of knowledge of others’ expertise;

– Lack of trust in others’ competence;

– Lack of interpersonal familiarity and trust;

– Belief that collaboration is inefficient associated with time pressure;

– Lack of collaboration skills and confidence; and

– Politics and lack of clarity that do not support collaboration.

Finally, Gardner identified that competitive organizational cultures as well as professions that cultivate distinguished reputations need to shift from individual-based (also called star-based) to collaboration-based systems, and organizational compensation systems should reward people for team results instead of individual results [20]. Performance pressure often leads people to become risk averse; and collaborating can be perceived as a risk. “The cost of collaboration is high at the


beginning with sometimes few benefits, but with time, this cost drops and the benefits increase exponentially to exceed the cost” [19]. Organizations need to provide enough time to collaboration efforts to reach that threshold.

2.1.3 KM and innovation

The Conference Board of Canada has identified four (4) key themes that correlate KM with organizational performance: a) organizational culture, b) leadership, c) strategic and deliberate actions, d) balance between operating within the necessary structure and encouraging room for creativity [21]. The following nine best practices to manage these themes were identified in their research:

– Investing in best practices: effective KM takes deliberate and consistent effort to document what works well;

– Making knowledge actionable: knowledge must be absorbed into the organization and then applied in order to have impact;

– Maintaining “living” knowledge asset bases: knowledge asset bases need ongoing editing and maintenance;

– Disseminating knowledge through mentoring, teaching, and learning programs: developing opportunities for employees to learn, teach, and share knowledge is an important KM and knowledge-sharing practice;

– Capturing the wealth of human capital: understanding and maximizing employees as knowledge resources, e.g., senior employees can be used as instructors and teachers for more junior staff;

– Communities of practice: many companies use established communities of practice to work collaboratively and establish new knowledge;

– Strategically retaining and sharing ideas: ideas are a strategic resource and many organizations employ techniques to organize, collect, and store ideas to be revisited in the future;

– Equipping the tool box: the right tools to document and share knowledge are critical for effective KM; and

– Fostering supportive culture: the important task is to build the right culture within the firm, e.g., the benefits of knowledge-sharing and collaboration need to be emphasized and weighed against security requirements.

Accordingly, collaborative human resource management practices are critical in an innovation process since they are allowing the knowledge of individuals from various areas to become a collective asset [22].

2.1.4 KM in the S&T organization

The core of any S&T organization is knowledge. Therefore, it is surprising to notice that organizations usually execute their KM in isolation from the other processes [9]. This may be related to the fact that, very often, management is mainly concerned with accountability rather than with efficiency and innovativeness of S&T processes [9]. Consequently, this emphasizes the


importance of strategically managing the knowledge in S&T organizations. Accordingly, it would be expected that, in S&T organizations, KM and strategic management should be deeply interconnected.

In their R&D KM model, Woojong Suh, JH Derick Sohn and Jun Yeon Kwak consider that the organizational characteristics of R&D value/goal, tasks, and human resources have a direct influence on the way knowledge is being managed in S&T organizations [23]. They consider that the ultimate value pursued by S&T organizations is creativity, and to maximize creative ideas, an open knowledge creation process allowing active exchange of results is required. Effectively, the sharing of knowledge is an indispensable condition for synergy exploitation. Furthermore, S&T people are known to aspire to pursue their own research objectives and to avoid low value creating activities [23]. For example, they mention that the documentation of existing knowledge is often considered a loss of time from the perspective of creativity. Another example would be Communities of Practice (CoP). While CoPs support common research interest groups, they do not necessarily incite knowledge utilization since the recognition associated with the creation of new knowledge can be perceived as more important than the one associated with the application of existing knowledge.

S&T environments face the same problems as the other types of organizations, i.e., focussing on the collection and the storage of knowledge instead of on the reuse of existing knowledge [14]. In addition to this problem, S&T organizations have the challenge of transferring knowledge across the boundaries of time and space [14]. To facilitate the knowledge transfer process in S&T organizations, three (3) types of KM contributors have been identified [14]:

– Knowledge facilitator: to be a catalyst in the knowledge creation and dissemination;

– Knowledge broker: to connect those with knowledge and experience with those that need it; and

– Knowledge activist: to energize and connect knowledge-creation efforts throughout the company.

2.1.5 KM strategy

The purpose of a KM Strategy is to translate an organization’s KM Vision into a defined set of actions and measurable goals [24]. Translating KM vision into a defined set of actions and measurable goals requires a full comprehension of the organization and its business drivers, and, accordingly, cannot be accomplished until the organization’s goals, objectives and vision are identified. Essentially, a KM strategy is about defining a business case, developing a future model of the organization, identifying the most important strategic recommendations, and creating a roadmap for implementing all these processes.

2.2 KM in other organizations

Since the early 1990s, KM has been explored as an approach to addressing organizational challenges in many sectors. Gartner has identified a common set of objectives from existing KM programs and pinpointed common KM problems amongst different types of organizations [25]:

– To stop expertise “walking out the door”;

– To reuse valuable knowledge especially for new hires or people in new roles;

12 Templa

–

–

–

ConsiguidaProdubenchmanagto: kidentitransftechno

In CaConfeKM gorganKM tr

Even publisdevelostrategits InFiguredevelo

Our aDefenpublis

ate in use: EO Pu

To stop reinv

To use best p

To make surinformation a

idering the nnce/best prac

uctivity & Qhmarking, begement. It is

knowledge mification and fer of best prology in KM;

anada, the Cerence Board good practicenizations and raining and K

with the exished on the toop and implegies. It shoulformation Me 4 [29]. Yopment.

allies seem tonce Science ashed an Info

ublishing App for

venting the w

practices to im

re decisions aas quickly an

need, some ctice to improQuality Centeest practicesan important

management, mapping; kn

ractices and l; driving enga

Council on of Canada (Cs. They condpublish paper

KM certificati

istence of thopic, one rapiement organizd be noted th

Management (IYet, there ar

Figu

o approach thand Technolormation Man

r SR-RD-EC Eng

wheel;

mprove consis

are made andnd effectively

organizationsove the manaer (APQC) s, process contributor toincluding a

nowledge caplessons learnagement and m

Information CBoC) [27] isduct regular mrs on their poon such as the

ese KM refeidly notices thzational informhat the GovernIM) Strategyre no compa

ure 4: GoC IM

he KM of thegy (DST) Gr

nagement &

g 2018-12-19_v1

stency and qu

d actions are as possible.

s have specigement of kn[26] which and performo the generatia KM stratpture; transfeed; expertisemanaging cha

and Knowls an organizatmeetings invoortal. Some Ce KM Institut

erence-organizhat, in real-lifmation strategnment of Can

y, using the farable KM p

M guiding pri

eir organizatiroup from theTechnology

(new disclaimer

uality; and

taken by the

ialized themsnowledge. Onis the worl

mance improion and dissemtegy and buer and reuse;e location; coange; maturit

ledge Managtion that activlving industri

Canadian orgate of Canada

zations and tfe, most of thgies rather thnada (GoC) isfive (5) guidipolicies or

inciples [29].

ions in a sime Australian D(IM&T) Str

DRr).dotm

right people

selves in thene of these isld’s foremostovement, anmination of musiness case; communitie

ontent managty; and measu

gement (CIKvely promotesial as well as

anizations are(KMIC) [28]

the amount ohe efforts are han knowledgs in the proceing principlestrategies in

.

milar way. ForDepartment orategic Plan t

RDC-RDDC-2

with the righ

e provision os the Americat authority i

nd knowledgmaterial relatees; knowledges of practicement; role o

urement.

KM) from ths sharing abous governmente specialized i.

of informatiobeing made t

ge managemeness of updatines identified in existence o

r example, thof Defence hato support th

019-D034

ht

of an in ge ed ge e; of

he ut tal in

on to nt ng in or

he as he


scientific research and development conducted by the DST Group [30]. The vision relates to the provision of modern and innovative technologies that enable improved science productivity, collaboration, communications and knowledge sharing. While the guiding principles are IM&T-focussed, one of their four (4) strategic themes is about the development of a KM strategy that should deliver relevant information and data management capabilities to enable innovation through sharing and reuse.

Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl), the United Kingdom (UK) Defence Research and Development Organization, has an integrated Information and Communications Technology (ICT) & Information Management Strategy (IMS) for 2012–2017 [31] which identifies the need to use information to generate knowledge and improve delivery (information exploitation) in their strategic plan. Currently, Dstl is working on the development of a knowledge and information management and exploitation strategy. They will be in a position to leverage the list of knowledge principles that the UK Government has published to guide the UK civil services in the management of their knowledge. These principles are [32]:

– Knowledge is a valued asset;

– Knowledge needs the right environment in order to thrive;

– Knowledge is captured where necessary and possible;

– Knowledge is freely sought and shared;

– Knowledge increases in value through reuse;

– Knowledge underpins individual learning; and

– Knowledge underpins organizational learning.

The existing focus on IM and more specifically on the information technology supporting the IM may relate to the fact that, since it is easier to manage information than knowledge, digital workplaces are often considered as a core enabler of KM [25]. In fact, according to Gartner, knowledge access and discovery are part of the top seven priorities driving investments in the digital workplace [25]:

– Increasing workforce productivity;

– Enabling new ways of working;

– Enhancing agility;

– Improving knowledge access and discovery;

– Promoting collaborative decision-making;

– Increasing employee satisfaction and retention; and

– Increasing innovation and creativity.

Nonetheless, it is interesting to notice that some organizations have decided to put the emphasis on the management of their knowledge instead of putting the emphasis exclusively on the information. The National Research Council (NRC) has a Knowledge Management Advisory Committee (NRC KMAC) to provide the Director General of NRC KM with advice as well as validate strategic directions regarding KM in response to the evolution of internal and external


environments. Other Canadian organizations such as the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) and Payments Canada as well as international organizations such as the United Nations (UN) development programme on the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) are examples of organizations that have KM strategies. While these strategies do not solve all KM problems, they allow the alignment and focus of their activities to solve organizational priorities from a KM lens.

NATO Supreme Allied Commander Transformation (SACT) is another interesting example of an organization that described itself as a knowledge-centric organization. Their approach is based on an Information and Knowledge Management (IKM) team linking people with processes and technology to achieve knowledge development and transfer. The intent is to have the knowledge at the core of their organization [33].

2.3 Impact of millennials’ departure on KM

Based on a study conducted by Deloitte on nearly 7,700 respondents distributed in 29 countries, 66% of millennials expect to leave their organization before five years while only 27% of them expect to stay in their organization more than five years [34]. Only 16% of them expect to stay in the organization more than 10 years. Considering the people as the main repository of knowledge in an organization, it is expected that the loss of knowledge may become a daily challenge in many organizations in the near future. Consequently, it becomes crucial to identify [5]:

– What knowledge is at risk?

– What effect will it have to lose it?

– How can it be retained?

Retention mechanisms that have been identified in the literature include [5]:

– Implementing reward structures to encourage sharing of key knowledge;

– Use of project teams and cross-functional project teams;

– After-action reviews;

– Storytelling;

– Mentoring programs and job shadowing;

– Interviews and exit interviews;

– Job rotation;

– Company procedures/processes manuals; and

– Taking advantage of the knowledge of retirees.


3 The state of DRDC’s KM

3.1 Previous KM efforts

As mentioned previously, DRDC has invested noticeable resources and efforts over the years to better understand the different dimensions of knowledge management within its specific context (the crossroads between science, technology and military applications). The work accomplished over the years included:

– The foundational work to understand and define the key elements related to the management of knowledge and collaboration in an S&T organization;

– The assessment of the applicability of KM techniques within DRDC from a service delivery perspective; and

– The investigation of the cultural aspects associated with a knowledge organization with the intent of identifying approaches to break the cultural apprehensions with respect to KM.

These different studies led to the recommendation, from Robert Mertenson, three (3) key principles to direct the implementation of a KM Strategy within DRDC [35]:

– Principle 1—Inclusion: All employees should be enabled to self-organize/self-allocate themselves based on their motivations and responsibilities for sharing their knowledge;

– Principle 2—Responsibility: Emphasize should be put on the responsibility to share at all levels; and

– Principle 3—Positive re-enforcement: Reward/appraisal/encouragement system(s) need to recognize both internal and external collaboration.

These high-level principles are important from a cultural perspective and need to be taken into consideration for the development as well as during the implementation of a KM Strategy at DRDC.

The current effort relates to a KM reengineering effort, with the intent of taking a more pragmatic approach to KM, which would be applicable to DRDC’s specific context.

3.2 DRDC KM challenges

The current KM effort was initiated by capturing information about the KM challenges perceived by DRDC employees to better appreciate the obstacles that could be addressed in the implementation of a strategy. The perceived KM challenges have been gathered during open discussions with individuals from across S&T. The main themes identified in the interviews have been grouped on a mind map (Figure 5), which provides a high-level understanding of the currently perceived KM challenges. It should be noted that this mind map represents the amalgamated view of a group of individuals and does not represent an exhaustive list of all KM challenges within DRDC. The four (4) themes that stood out from the discussions are detailed hereafter:


– Limited infra/infostructure: DRDC’s context of work requires a multi-level security environment, which is a lot more complex and demanding in terms of training, documentation, processes, info/infrastructure and resources;

– Knowledge lost: DRDC knowledge assets are not fully captured, stored, organized and are difficult to retrieve. Knowledge retention is being done on an ad hoc basis while assessment of knowledge produced by DRDC is being perceived as limited. DRDC people feel disengaged from a KM perspective which could be a side effect of the GoC centralization with respect to IM&T, the lack of integration between processes, organizations and resources and the lack of tools to efficiently accomplish the work that is required to meet the expectations;

– Knowledge silos: Sharing of knowledge inside DRDC can be a challenge, due to a lack of will, a lack of time, a lack of info/infrastructure and a lack of integration of processes/tasks /efforts. Similarly, collaboration with external organizations is problematic due to the sensitive/strategic context of DRDC’s work which limits the technical means that could be used for transmission of information, the perception of not receiving sufficient recognition for collaboration, a lack of infrastructure for information management, and misunderstanding of the expectations in terms of sharing in the context of open science; and

– Limited reuse of knowledge: Exploitation of DRDC knowledge by its employees is often limited due to a lack of reach back, the existence of organizational silos and the limited visibility on DRDC’s extended knowledge. Similarly, the exploitation of DRDC knowledge outside DRDC is limited by the lack of knowledge persistence within the organization, the restricted S&T knowledge communication and transfer mechanisms as well as the lack of “follow-on” on project outcomes (when projects are completed).

DRDC

C-RDDC-20199-D034

Figuure 5: Perceiv

ved DRDC KMM challenges

s.

17

18 Templa

3.3

The Kconsidknowfive (5our or

–

–

–

–

–

3.3.1

All DknowS&T of expto colcondutechnoorgan

The sof sciwastin

ate in use: EO Pu

DRDC

KM framewodered from a ledge in sup5) main comprganization ev

DRDC stake

DRDC critic

DRDC repos

DRDC proce

DRDC conte

1 Stake

RDC employledge, since torganization,pertise, eager llaborators in ucting the S&ologies, so th

nization could

cientific comience and usung time on in

ublishing App for

C’s KM fra

rk of an orgaKM point of

pport of DRponents. Thesvolves in, are

eholders;

cal knowledge

sitories of kno

esses; and

ext.

Figu

holders

yees should dithey constitut is staffed wito learn new allied organi

&T business whey have high

d provide them

mmunity is genually spares nappropriate p

r SR-RD-EC Eng

amework

anization repf view. The aRDC’s S&T se component:

e assets;

owledge asset

ure 6: Propos

irectly contribte the core staith well-educathings and to

izations, and,with differenh expectation

m to conduct t

nerally compno efforts to

processes, tech

g 2018-12-19_v1

resents a set analysis of th

strategic obts, which con

ts;

sed DRDC KM

bute to and beakeholders ofated people tho push the kno accordingly,

nt countries. Tns regarding their day-to-d

osed of peopreach the ob

hnologies or p

(new disclaimer

of high-levehe different dbjectives led

nstitute the pro

M framework

enefit from a f DRDC’s KMhat are at the owledge limit, are well awaThey are conthe type of t

day duties.

le that are debjectives. Howpolicies.

DRr).dotm

el componentdimensions ofd to the ideoposed KM f

k.

better managM strategy. Dstate of the a

ts further. Thare of the difnducting S&Ttechnology an

edicated to thewever, they d

RDC-RDDC-2

ts that must bf managing thentification oframework th

gement of theDRDC, being art in their arehey have accesfferent ways oT on the latend process th

e advancemendo not tolera

019-D034

be he of

hat

eir a

ea ss of

est he

nt te


The way DRDC manages its knowledge has an effect on the people having to work with or interact with the organization. They constitute the surrounding stakeholders that are mainly originating from these organizations:

– DND and Canadian Armed Forces (CAF);

– Public Safety;

– Canadian security partners (industry/academia/…);

– Public Services Procurement Canada (PSPC);

– Allied Countries; and

– Shared Services Canada.

3.3.2 Business processes

At DRDC, KM is not considered as a separate organizational process. It is rather embedded into our core organizational processes which are listed hereafter:

– S&T capabilities life-cycle, which includes:

– S&T capability management;

– S&T program formulation, which includes:

– Program management;

– S&T project execution, which includes:

– Project management; and

– Publication management.

– Corporate processes, which include:

– External relation management;

– IM management;

– Financial management;

– HR management;

– Security/safety management; and

– Infrastructure management.

While this approach is good to avoid managing knowledge as a specific silo process by itself, it requires additional rigour in the execution of the KM activities to get knowledge of good quality. Even if everyone in DRDC is keen to say that knowledge is at the core of the organization, very little evidence explicitly describes individual KM processes as well as the link between these KM processes. This leads to a lack of knowledge transfer between core businesses as well as a lack of uniformity in the conduct of key KM activities such as:

– Knowledge discovery;

– Knowledge gathering;


– Knowledge creation;

– Knowledge retention;

– Knowledge organization and storage;

– Knowledge sharing;

– Knowledge use;

– Knowledge assessment; and

– KM Process assessment.

3.3.3 Critical knowledge areas

At DRDC, most of the work relates to the representation, organization, acquisition, creation, usage, and evolution of knowledge. Knowledge assets that are gained through experience, observation, study and research can take many forms. Based on what can be found in the literature, knowledge assets at DRDC can be identified as:

– Data;

– Information;

– Decisions;

– Ideas;

– Vision;

– Understanding;

– Memory;

– Insights;

– Skills (cognitive, technical);

– Competencies;

– Areas of expertise;

– Contacts;

– Capabilities;

– Experience;

– Guidelines;

– Routines / ways of doing things / work practices; and

– Organizational structure.

Knowledge can either be theoretical or practical, but it is important to understand that, since all knowledge is perishable, it requires an active life-cycle management to maintain its value. Therefore, latent knowledge needs must be identified and its potential suitability or applicability needs must be assessed as well as the cost to minimize the effort of making it current.


Considering all types of knowledge that are created, shared, used within DRDC, three (3) high-level categories of critical knowledge areas have been identified:

1. Client S&T requirements;

2. S&T capabilities; and

3. Organizational processes.

The first critical knowledge area is the knowledge related to the S&T requirements of the clients (DND / CAF / Public Safety & Security / GoC). This is a key area that makes DRDC very distinct from any other organizations. Practically, DRDC is in a unique position to understand the distinction between what the clients want, what they need and like, extrapolate their S&T requirements, and put that in perceptive with respect to the approaches that could be used to fulfill the needs (e.g., R&D versus engineering). Currently, this knowledge is categorized into the following S&T programs:

– Strategic Decision Support;

– Navy;

– Army;

– Air Force;

– Personnel;

– Joint Force Development;

– Force Employment; and

– Security Science.

The second critical knowledge area of DRDC relates to the S&T capabilities of the organization. It includes the knowledge of:

– The S&T expertise developed in the past or in under development in the organization (DRDC S&T expertise is organized into a high-level taxonomy as presented in the Annex A);

– The current and past DRDC S&T infrastructure as well as the S&T infrastructure that would be required to conduct S&T in new domains (it includes laboratories, experimentation fields, etc.); and

– The S&T partners, at the national and international levels, as well as their capabilities in terms of expertise, infrastructure and networking (these partners include NATO, TTCP, specific countries (such as the US and UK), Other Government Departments (OGDs), Non-governmental Organizations (NGOs), industry and academia).

The third critical knowledge area of DRDC is the knowledge of the core organizational processes as well as the KM processes. As mentioned earlier, it covers the elements hereafter.

– The S&T capabilities life-cycle: The S&T capabilities life-cycle is partly documented in the annual business plan;


– The S&T program formulation: The S&T program formulation is currently in refinement and specificities exist for each portfolio;

– The S&T projects execution: Significant efforts have been invested into the development of project management processes and publication management process;

– The internal services: Many of these services have recently been subject to a renewal in order to be put in the perspective of the Government of Canada Objective 2020. It is important to understand that these processes often depend on other departments or organizations for policy direction. They include external relations management, IM management, financial management, Human Resource (HR) management, security/safety management, and infrastructure management;

– The KM processes: While the KM processes are at the core of our organization, some are currently managed implicitly rather than overtly and are very dependent on the individuals involved. These informal KM processes that DRDC has developed over the years affect:

– Knowledge discovery;

– Knowledge gathering;

– Knowledge creation;

– Knowledge retention;

– Knowledge organization and storage;

– Knowledge sharing;

– Knowledge use;

– Knowledge assessment; and

– KM process assessment.

3.3.4 Repositories of knowledge assets

While an understanding of the different knowledge assets is important, it is even more important to have a complete awareness of the different types of knowledge asset repositories. Without the awareness of the existence of these repositories, there are very few chances that the knowledge will be used. Based on informal discussions with DRDC’s staff, we have identified that the main DRDC knowledge repositories are:

– Workforce: The main DRDC knowledge currently resides in its people (DRDC’s employees) in tacit form. This makes it very challenging for business continuity, considering that the departure of an employee leads to the lost a whole pan of the corporate or technical knowledge that resides within this individual;

– Teams: The composition of teams that are involved in specific projects is a very important tacit repository of knowledge. It relates to knowledge that results from the synergy created by the involvement of the different team members;

– Document Collection and Database: DRDC has collected its publications and other defence S&T documents since its predecessor, the Defence Research Board, which was established in 1947. All documents are either accessible through or reside in the Canadian Defence Information Database/System (Candid/Candis). Currently, the organization has a robust


S&T publication process with four (4) different types of documents: Scientific Brief, Scientific Letter, Scientific Report and Reference Document;

– Official Records: S&T/DRDC centres are obliged to follow the GoC record keeping policies and standards as guided by DND and specifically, the Defence Subject Classification and Disposition System (DSCDS). Paper record management has been mixed across the organization and was historically more accurate prior to 1995;

– GCDOCS: The Electronic Document Management System was introduced to headquarters and senior research centre staff in March 2017 and is now the only official records repository for the organization;

– Policies: Policies from Central Agencies, DND or S&T/DRDC are documented and available on accessible websites or intranets;

– DRDC Library: The agency library maintains hardcopy collections of books, documents and other media, as well as an extensive virtual collection of bibliographic databases and journals on the Nexus intranet;

– Standards: Standards are kept in various locations, in the DRDC Library, on official files, on shared drives or collaborative workspaces;

– Patents: Patent documents are being managed by Director S&T External Relations (DSTER) on the Nexus workspace as well as in official files;

– Intellectual Property: Intellectual property documents are being managed by DSTER on the Nexus workspace as well as in official files;

– MOU/Agreements: MOU documents are being managed by DSTER on the Nexus workspace as well as in official files;

– Email: Emails are used as an information management repository for many of the employees regarding details of the conduct of work, contacts, justifications of decision, etc. They provide traceability evidences of sources of ideas, contributions, etc. They mainly reside on ‘.pst’ files on individual hard drives;

– Contracts: Contracts are documents officially managed by the procurement team and the Public Service and Procurement Canada (PSPC) IM environment;

– Organizational Charts: Documents are kept on the Nexus intranet, although they are dated immediately upon publishing;

– Nexus/Sites: Nexus is the official intranet for the organization. While Research Centres transition to the new platform, some information is still only available on those intranets. Descartes has been decommissioned and some archives are still available. Sites is the collaboration zone of Nexus; and

– Internet Sites: DRDC publishes general information on the external website, which is often considered the authorized source of corporate information.

Many DRDC knowledge assets or knowledge asset repositories are managed on an ad hoc basis and mainly stored on personal or shared drives. Those are:

– Working documents: Working documents from the employees are mainly kept on personal drives or shared drives, depending on the people involved and the infrastructure available;


– Procedures, guidelines, routines, work practices, checklists: This information is not always documented or may not be accessible broadly;

– Databases: Databases of scenario data, data sets, experimentation data collection, etc. are stored using different tools and maintained in different ways throughout the organization. There is a lack of standardized processes and the data sets are not readily accessible or retrievable; and

– Software: Software is being developed and recorded everywhere in the organization on individuals or shared drives. Some of them are required in support of corporate processes, others are in support of S&T. There is currently no integrated view of what exists within DRDC, nor the accompanying documentation.

3.3.5 Context

The context in which DRDC operates is in a continuous informational dilemma. On the one hand, it has the mandate to work in the domains of Defence, Public Safety & Security which typically involves strategic, sensitive and/or classified information; and Controlled Goods. These types of information require specific security levels for individuals, infrastructure, and rigorous information and material management processes to ensure adequate protection of sensitive resources. Furthermore, considering the impact of these constraints on employees and potential risks, there is a strong tendency to stay on the safe side and limit the diffusion of information as much as possible.

On the other hand, DRDC is an S&T organization that needs to maintain a vivid relationship with the national and international scientific communities in order to support S&T development through the sharing of new ideas, fostering of innovation or the validation and assessment of new concepts. In addition, the Government of Canada promotes a greater openness through its Open Government, Open Science and Open Data initiatives. Therefore, DRDC must always stay on the fine line between sharing everything that can be shared without putting at risk the security of the country or its partners. Furthermore, as an S&T organization it has to deal with uncertainties, and take risks which further complicates the approach.

Another important aspect of DRDC’s context of work relates to the fact that, as an agency of the DND within the Government of Canada, DRDC is a public organization. DRDC operations have to be conducted with respect to the Government of Canada and the DND regulations based on the Treasury Board Management Accountability Framework. In addition, DRDC is geographically distributed, as well as in terms of areas of expertise (which are distributed throughout the different centres). Finally, the CAF/DND and public safety and security clients are geographically distributed and characterized by their respective silos of needs.

The DRDC infrastructure in terms of materiel (computers, etc.), networks (DRENet, DWAN, CSNI, etc.) and IM/KM tools (GCDOCS, Outlook, Nexus, NATO Science Connect, TTCP SharePoint, partners, NEXUS, Descartes, GCCampus, DLNRAD, etc.) is dependent on Shared Services Canada’s policies, rules and resources, which do not always provide the flexibility required for an S&T environment. Furthermore, due to its defence and security mandate, geographically distributed contributors have to work together at all different levels of security, which significantly increase the complexity of the required infrastructure for operations.


DRDC infrastructure, which is managed by Assistant Deputy Minister (Infrastructure and Environment) (ADM(IE)), has limitations due to its age and its inability to better support collaboration in terms of physical spaces, and multi-levels of security.

Finally, when looking closely at Director General Science and Technology Centre Operations (DGSTCO) situation in terms of employees’ retention rate, numbers show that:

– In 2016, 134 over 1005 employees were eligible for retirement (13 %);

– In 2017, 177 over 1005 employees were eligible for retirement (18%); and

– In 2018, 212 over 1005 employees will be eligible for retirement (21%).

For the subsequent years, the trend is accelerating. The departure of senior employees in the organization will lead to an important loss of knowledge, from an overall corporate KM perspective, as well as S&T areas of expertise.


4 A proposed KM strategy for DRDC

4.1 Strategic considerations

The “raison d’être” of DRDC is to provide knowledge and technology advantage to support defence and security operations at home and abroad which reinforce the importance of managing our knowledge for the success of our organization. This is confirmed in the S&T strategy published in 2013 by the Assistant Deputy Minister (Science & Technology) (ADM(S&T)) by the identification of KM as: “… an enabler to provide trusted access to S&T knowledge, expertise and know-how, wherever it exists, and to deliver these in a timely fashion for maximum impact” [1].

A KM strategy is then required to ensure that the vision, the context and the challenges are shared within the organization and the necessary actions are defined to meet organizational expectations. Such a strategy puts in perspective the importance of gathering, organizing, sharing and adapting/using the knowledge towards the accomplishment of the organizational main mission. It provides high-level directions to implement the KM vision of the organization and ensures that the implementation of the organizational KM:

– proceeds in a way that is aligned with the current business approaches;

– is targeted on the right problems; and

– is coordinated with other existing change initiatives.

As the primary delivery agent for the departmental S&T investment of DND, DRDC has a key role in the provision of S&T for six (6) departmental objectives that are [2]:

1. Build agile and adaptable forces to carry out missions across a wide spectrum of operations;

2. Assist and support CAF and civilian personnel before, during and after operations;

3. Enable the acquisition, sharing and use of critical information in support of situational awareness and decision-making;

4. Develop and implement solutions to maximize the affordability and sustainability of DND and the CAF;

5. Support public safety and security practitioners in their mission to protect Canadians; and

6. Anticipate, prepare for and counter the emergence of future threats.

The new Canadian Defence Policy, entitled “Strong, Secure, Engaged,” emphasizes the need to conduct cutting-edge research and development in close collaboration with allies, industry, and academia to enhance capabilities and support the CAF’s capability requirements and missions [36]. KM is key to support DRDC in its role of provision of S&T for the DND and the CAF. To fulfill the S&T/R&D requirements described in the new Defence Policy, the 2013 S&T strategy identifies three (3) principal modes of S&T delivery: access, build and collaborate [2]. While each one of these three (3) modes implies different levels of internal S&T capacities, all of them necessitate internal S&T expertise. The Access mode requires the necessary internal S&T expertise to direct and lead the research funding to external parties as well as to assess the S&T


value of these external efforts. The S&T capacity in the Build mode involves the internal development of new S&T concepts which require expertise in specific areas. The Collaborate mode requires the maintenance of sufficient internal S&T expertise and capacity to contribute to shared projects with external partners. Accordingly, S&T expertise is needed internally within DRDC in all cases, however, the level of the related S&T capacity may be different. In any cases, KM will be a key element to the success of DRDC’s mission, since it is “an enabler to provide trusted access to S&T knowledge, expertise and know-how, wherever it exists, and to deliver these in a timely fashion for maximum impact” [2].

4.1.1 DRDC value, vision, mission, objectives

“If KM fails to add value to the organization, it is only cost intensive, useless, or even counterproductive” [37].

To add value to an organization, KM needs to directly contribute to its vision and mission. Aimed at being a national leader and international partner in S&T critical to Canada’s defence and security, DRDC has the mission to provide a science, technology and knowledge advantage for Canada’s defence and security. KM should then be developed to become a critical enabler to the four (4) DRDC roles, which are associated with the accomplishment of its mission [38]:

– Delivers knowledge, analysis and advice based on science and technology;

– Recruits new ideas, knowledge and solutions by engaging with national and international partners;

– Performs research and development in classified, sensitive and strategic areas; and

– Develops as a well-managed research organization that promotes a respectful and inclusive workplace.

By supporting the advancement of S&T activities as well as the delivery of S&T advice to CAF/DND, KM can directly contribute to DRDC strategic objectives of [39]:

– Advance Science and Technology activities that enhance Force Posture and Readiness, the Strategic Orientation Look Ahead, All Domain Situational Awareness, joint targeting, the contested urban environment, and cyber and space; and

– Progress the implementation of plans for enhancing the delivery of Science and Technology advice to National Defence.

Last but not least, as a knowledge organization where most of S&T knowledge resides in its people, the DRDC personnel is at the core of the organization. Therefore, KM should be aligned with the values promoted by the organization, since these values are crucial to the development and sustainment of an engaged workforce in a healthy workplace. The DRDC KM Strategy should then be consistent with DRDC’s organizational values of [40]:

– Trust;

– Respect;

– Commitment;

– Client focus;


– Creativity;

– Innovation;

– Teamwork;

– Leadership;

– Professionalism; and

– Integrity.

4.1.2 DRDC KM Journey

As detailed in Subsection 3.2, the main DRDC KM challenges are:

– Knowledge hermetic silos based on organizational structures and/or programs/clients;

– Loss of knowledge (expertise “walking out the door”);

– Limited reuse of existing knowledge (there is a perception of a lack of knowledge alignment between our activities); and

– Lack of adequate infra/infostructures.

As a result, the DRDC KM strategy should focus the KM effort to improve performance on these issues. In fact, KM can become a privileged support tool to improve the achievement of the DRDC S&T Strategy in terms of:

– Effectiveness:

– By helping people to quickly find the knowledge they need and, in the process, save time and avoid duplicating the efforts of others;

– By supporting/improving quality knowledge;

– By supporting/improving innovation, enabling knowledge creation (by exposing people to new ideas and approaches);

– By supporting/improving organizational resilience;

– Efficiency:

– By making people aware of lessons learned from research and experience and encouraging them to adopt best practices;

– By supporting/improving knowledge flows between staff, teams, groups, centres, domain of expertise, and organizations;

– By supporting/improving different knowledge related processes (e.g., retrieve/capture/create/use/reuse/sustain/retain/exploit/transfer/sharing/disposal);

– Empowerment:

– By giving employees at every level the knowledge and confidence to make well-informed decisions.

Accordingly, it is recommended that DRDC should become a knowledge ecosystem, where:


– Collaborative capabilities transcend structures;

– Knowledge is managed as THE critical asset of our organization; and

– Our S&T knowledge is highly used/reused by those that need it (Defence & Security decision makers and researchers).

4.2 A KM vision for DRDC

KM, as an enabler of the DRDC vision (being a national leader and an international partner in S&T critical to Canada’s defence and security), should provide the foundation to foster the development and the integration of the required knowledge through the access, build and collaborate modes leading to the provision of timely S&T advice to CAF and DND. Accordingly, a KM vision supporting the DRDC vision is proposed as:

DRDC S&T knowledge is accessible, nationally & internationally recognized, and highly used to foster innovation and inform decision makers.

4.3 KM principles for DRDC

Different means can bring the organization from its current status to where we want it to be. To orient the people through that journey, some principles have to be laid down, taking into account the organization’s values, vision, mission and objectives in the transition process. Based on the analysis of those of S&T, the following principles are proposed to orient the implementation efforts of DRDC’s KM vision:

– DRDC seeks for S&T excellence through the development of our people, processes and infra/infostructures;

– DRDC values our knowledge in making it available and easily findable;

– DRDC empowers the “need to share” to enable those that “need to know”; and

– DRDC manages our S&T knowledge to facilitate its exploitation by those that need it (Defence & Security decision makers and researchers).

4.4 Proposed DRDC KM goals

Based on the high-level KM challenges previously identified, the recent KM advancements as well as the approach taken by other organizations, eight (8) KM goals have been identified for the context of DRDC. These proposed goals are:

1. Know what we know: DRDC employees need to be aware of the knowledge existing in DRDC;

2. Capture critical knowledge: All DRDC critical knowledge needs to be captured;

3. Preserve critical knowledge: Critical DRDC knowledge has to be retained within the organization;

4. Organize and retrieve knowledge: Processes and technology need to be in place to easily store, organize and retrieve knowledge in a coherent way;


5. Foster smart sharing and collaboration within and with others: DRDC knowledge needs to be shared amongst DRDC employees as well as with partners and the public to support efficiency and innovation;

6. Facilitate use and reuse: DRDC knowledge has to be of high quality and in a format that facilitates its use and reuse by DRDC members and clients;

7. Maintain “collective” responsibility: Every DRDC employee needs to be engaged into the management of knowledge; and

8. Assure “collective” governance: KM governance has to be well-defined, known, and applied by everyone.

4.5 Risk management strategy

The implementation of a new strategy in an organization is always subject to elements of risk. To better manage the overall level of risk, a mitigation plan has been developed considering the elements of risk associated with the implementation of the KM strategy that were considered the most probable by the authors.

The first element of risk relates to the main driver behind the execution of the KM activities. This would happen, for instance, if KM is carried out for its own sake instead of overall organizational effectiveness improvement. In such a case, KM would end up consuming resources without bringing its full value to the organization. To reduce this risk element, it is recommended that the:

– KM Strategy be developed to specifically enforce organizational mission and values;

– KM initiatives be carefully aligned with operational and strategic objectives; and

– KM performance be linked with staff and organizational performance assessment.

A second element of risk relates to the way KM initiatives will be implemented. For instance, it is possible that a KM initiative could be ineffective due to a specific approach in the implementation (for example using a IM tool that is not optimized for the type of work to be done). In this case, KM initiatives would be more or less successful. To reduce this risk element, it is recommended that the:

– KM initiatives be managed at the operational and tactical levels (directors, managers and supervisors); and

– KM initiatives be reviewed at the executive level (director general) to ensure the alignment with strategic objectives.

A third element of risk would be a limited engagement of DRDC staff in the implementation of the KM strategy. People engagement is key to ensure an effective and realistic approach as well as to avoid gaps in the way DRDC manages its knowledge. To reduce this risk element, it is recommended that:

– New tools or approaches be gradually introduced to specific sub-groups, and appropriate training and support are provided; and

– A group of KM-sensitive influencers be established and used as guinea pigs for the progressive implementation of the actions, which will create a momentum and


progressively engage the skeptics (it is expected that the KM influencers will act as evangelists or ambassadors).

The final risk element that has been identified relates to the quality standards within the organization. For instance, if the S&T knowledge does not meet the high-quality standards expected despite effective KM processes, DRDC would not be achieving its mission. To reduce this risk element, it is recommended that the:

– Organizational quality assurance system be standard and include the quality of knowledge managed as well as the quality of the knowledge management processes.

4.6 KM strategy assessment

An assessment approach is necessary to determine if the proposed KM strategy could meet the expected outcomes. The assessment of the proposed KM strategy will be conducted by answering a series of questions to estimate how far the organization is from its desired end state. To be as comprehensive as possible, it is recommended that these questions look at two different aspects of abstractions: global assessment and initiatives assessment.

– Level 1—Global assessment:

– Do our collaborative capabilities transcend our organizational structures/programs/clients?

– Do we manage our knowledge as THE critical asset of our organization?

– Who is using our S&T knowledge (Defence & Security decision makers and researchers)? How? How often?

– Level 2—Initiatives assessment:

– How efficient is an initiative? Have we implemented it correctly?

– How effective is an initiative? Does it support our KM goals?

The strategy can be implemented in various ways, which may involve different approaches to answer these questions. To ensure that all the elements identified for each level will be considered and balanced, it is recommended that DRDC identify a series of possible approaches while developing the implementation plan.

Considering that implementing such a KM Strategy implies a significant change of culture, in particular within the DRDC context, it is expected that its application will take time and, consequently, it should be planned as a continuous effort towards an extended period of time. In addition, to ensure a continuous progress, the conduct of a knowledge audit would be appropriate at regular intervals in order to monitor the evolution of the KM strategy implementation.


5 Proposed DRDC KM roadmap

The implementation of the KM strategy can be realized through an integrated action roadmap which will take into consideration a change management framework that is appropriate to DRDC employees, structure, processes and context.

5.1 Change management framework

The management of knowledge within an organization is more than a set of processes or tools, it directly relates to its culture. Since it takes years, even decades, to change the culture of an organization, it is recommended to use an approach that will slowly, but surely, root the desired behaviours in the organization, leading to a change of culture, over an extended period of time.

Furthermore, considering the diversity of people working at DRDC, in terms of background, working areas, culture, generations and roles, it would be illusory to think that the same tool or approach would attract (“talk to”) everyone in the same way. It is believed that an approach that allows the use of a diversity of tools, to reach a larger range of people within the organization, would globally be a lot more effective.

Accordingly, in order to effectively implement the KM strategy, a diversity of tools (including structure, processes, training and IT) should be gradually introduced to different subgroups based on the specific profiles. Then, based on the lessons learned, these tools should be adjusted before being deployed to the larger community.

5.2 KM integrated action roadmap

To ensure a clear and direct way ahead, each KM goal of the proposed KM strategy can be considered as a line of effort. Each line of effort can be further developed into more specific objectives, which allow the identification of a set of KM initiatives that can be implemented in diverse ways. Because of their nature, different KM actions can then be associated with each one of the initiatives. While in many cases, a KM action can contribute to the achievement of more than one goal, to simplify the presentation and the discussion, they are associated hereafter to only one main line of effort.

To improve the successful implementation of the proposed KM Strategy, the KM goals need to stay stable over multiple years. However, the KM objectives with their associated KM initiatives and KM actions will have to be adjusted according to the evolution of the organizational KM situational context and priorities. Furthermore, it is important that KM activities are not conducted in isolation, otherwise they may end up being counterproductive. Therefore, most of the time, they will be embedded into existing business process activities or initiatives.

The following subsections propose, for each KM goal, a list of KM objectives with their initiatives and associated KM actions, as identified at the time of this study. While most of the KM actions have been extracted from the literature survey, some of them have been specifically tailored in response to the challenge of DRDC specific context based on informal discussions with employees. Furthermore, it would be presumptuous to consider all these KM actions as new to the organization. In fact, some of them are already implemented locally or through the


organization, while others are being planned or are in the process of being implemented towards the organization. The idea here is to establish a comprehensive awareness of all KM actions that could contribute to the implementation of the proposed KM strategy.

To ensure coherence in the presentation of the ideas, the following subsections are structured identically, first identifying the KM goal and its related KM objective, then the related KM initiatives and, finally, the resulting KM actions as follow:

– Goal/Objective:

– Initiatives:

Actions.

34 Template in

n use: EO Publishing App for SR-RD-EC EEng 2018-12-19_v1 (n

Figure 7:

new disclaimer).dotm

: Proposed KM liines of effort

DRDC-RDDCC -2019-D034


5.2.1 KM Goal 1—Know what we know

DRDC employees need to be aware of the knowledge existing within the organization. To do so, they need to access tools to increase their awareness of DRDC expertise, projects, collaborators and partners. Potential initiatives associated with this objective are listed hereafter:

1. Information web pages—Intranet web pages would provide up-to-date information about existingDRDC activities. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are detailed below:

a. Program pages: All programs need to have pages on the intranet and theses pages have to bemaintained up-to-date. Updating the program page should be the responsibility of theprogram team;

b. Project pages: All projects need to have pages on the intranet and theses pages need to bemaintained up-to-date. Updating the project page should be the responsibility of the projectteam. In addition to the description of the project and status related to milestones/outputs, itshould include the competency grid of the project: what were the competencies required toexecute the project, and what were the competencies developed during the project;

c. DRDC S&T Capabilities pages: Current and future DRDC S&T capabilities should beidentified on the S&T capability web pages. These pages will provide the description of theS&T capabilities as well as the expertise associated with them;

2. Dashboards—A dashboard would display the current status of performance organizationalindicators. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are detailed below:

a. Dashboard of all DRDC initiatives: A simple list of all ongoing initiatives within theAgency will provide information about the initiatives, their current status, and the main pointof contact. Right now, many KM initiatives are conducted locally. This tool would facilitatesynchronization and leveraging of efforts towards the labs, sections, teams, etc. A moreelaborated dashboard could provide additional details on the status and results of eachinitiative;

b. Dashboard on national/international networking: Dashboard on national/internationalnetworking will provide information about Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU)agreements with national and international partners (who, what, when, with whom). Thiswould facilitate a better leveraging of existing national/international networking;

c. Dashboard on national collaborations/contracts: Dashboard on nationalcollaborations/contracts should include the subject, the work done, the DRDC Point ofContact (POC), the deliverables and the time of execution. This could avoid duplication ofeffort and facilitate leveraging;

d. Dashboard on conferences/events of interest: Having a dashboard on conferences/events ofinterest with details of the location of the meeting, date, aim, attendance will allowemployees to identify potential sources of information and would provide the ability forpeople to contact the DRDC attendee before and/or after the conference;


e. Dashboard on IP/patents: A dashboard on IP/patents would give visibility to DRDC staff on successful findings, facilitate leveraging when applicable and recognize staff’s achievements;

3. News feeds—A news feed service would provide news on a regular or continuous basis. Proposed KM actions related to this are detailed below:

a. Publication news feed for DRDC authors: Publication news feed for all documents published by DRDC authors (including Reports, Letters, Contract, External, etc.) will provide a larger visibility of the work being performed by DRDC employees. It could be updated on NEXUS by DRDC publication staff and/or librarian;

b. Newsfeed on external collaboration: Having a newsfeed on the events related to external collaboration with details of the location of the meeting, date, aim, attendance will allow employees to identify potential sources of information and contact the DRDC attendee before/after the meeting;

4. Publication lists—A publication list would enumerate the list of publications produced by an author for a specific project. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. Publication lists for DRDC staff: Individual profiles on NEXUS could include the list of publications for each employee. These lists on NEXUS profiles can then be used for Professional Development Assessment (PDA) of the scientists;

b. Automated creation of publication lists for DRDC employees: The e-Pub tool could produce an updated publication list for each author. This list could be made available on the NEXUS profile of the author. It could be used as a source of information to automatically update the expertise locator. These updated lists on NEXUS profiles can then be used in support of the PDA process;

c. Automated publication lists by project: Automated publication lists are produced for each project and published on the project page;

5. Knowledge map—Knowledge maps locate the sources of knowledge in an organization and show how that knowledge flows to others. Sources of knowledge could be DRDC employees, partners, reports, documents, prototypes, images, etc. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. DRDC expertise locator: The expertise locator could reside in a skills directory, or “Yellow Pages.” It would list all staff members’ areas of expertise and experience along with their contact information in an online directory. It would support anyone in the organization to find experts in different areas of S&T. The expertise published on the profile of the individuals could also be considered during the scientist PDA. DRDC has currently a tool to document the expertise of its staff on NEXUS. It should be noted that there might be a privacy or security problem with expertise locator that might need to be further investigated;

b. DRDC knowledge map: Knowledge maps, also called knowledge cartography, are tools to present the knowledge available within an organization and its associated resources. They


identify what knowledge is accessible and where it is (e.g., people, media, organizational units or sources of knowledge outside the organization). They also demonstrate the patterns of knowledge flows (access, distribution, learning) [41]; and

c. Automated knowledge map: Knowledge maps can be automatically updated based on new information/knowledge being added to the DRDC intranet/publication tools. It can include tools such as data mining or web mining.

5.2.2 KM Goal 2—Capture critical knowledge

The reuse of existing knowledge requires that it has to be documented at some point of time. Accordingly, it is important that all DRDC critical knowledge need are captured. A first step towards this objective is that DRDC employees have mechanisms to facilitate the capture of knowledge. Related initiatives are proposed hereafter:

6. Global S&T awareness—Activities to develop global S&T situational awareness are conducted, documented and made available to everyone. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. S&T Outlook: S&T outlook products conducted to identify and assess S&T trends should be made available to everyone. They can include emerging technologies (which new capabilities could cause disruptions, new opportunities, etc.), horizon scanning (changes in the state of the art), and technology watch (monitoring technology evolution for passing significant barriers);

b. Trip reports: Trip reports should be produced to summarize the main findings/facts/networkings of each trip. This is a mechanism to facilitate the sharing of S&T trends and networking opportunities;

7. Lessons learned—The lessons learned resulting from an after-action review or a hot wash should be documented in the final report of projects as formal deliverables. It should include an after-action review of the knowledge management done during the project as well as the collaborative capabilities (what happened, why it happened, and how it can be done better). The results would be of interest to the general audience and should be made easily accessible to everyone. A KM action related to this initiative could be:

a. Project closeout process: A project closeout process should be adjusted to capture lessons learned;

8. DRDC critical knowledge inventory—Knowledge that is critical to the achievement of organizational mission and the conduct of the operations needs to be identified and documented. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. Critical knowledge identified by S&T areas/services: Each section, services should identify what constitutes their critical knowledge;


b. DRDC templates for the documentation of critical knowledge: DRDC should have templates for the documentation of critical knowledge. Different types of critical knowledge may require different types of templates. The documentation of knowledge assets can include:

i. The identification of knowledge assets [42]:

Where is the knowledge asset?

What does it contain?

What is its use?

What form is it in?

How accessible is it?

ii. The nature of knowledge [43]:

The depth: non-expert, technical, specialized, expert;

The width: specific, multidisciplinary, transdisciplinary, generalized;

The complexity: complicated, simple complexity, complexity, high complexity;

iii. The added value of the knowledge [42]:

What are the opportunities for using the knowledge asset?

What would be the effect of its use?

What are the current obstacles to its use?

What would be its increased value to the company?

9. Idea incubators—A concept of idea incubators could be developed to foster new ideas and identify contributors. A potential KM action related to this initiative is:

a. Idea Incubators: DRDC should have a set of idea incubators in a subset of critical S&T areas. It should exist in terms of process and supporting tools.

A second objective towards the goal of capturing critical knowledge would be that all DRDC businesses be documented and accessible by the employees. Potential initiatives associated with this objective are listed hereafter:

10. DRDC business documentation—All business structures and processes should be documented. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. Dynamic organizational charts: Organization charts should be accessible by all employees and easy to update. To really be useful, these organizational charts should represent the real status of the organization, including information about posting, short-term assignments, etc. This requires a dynamic tool for the management of the organizational charts;

b. Documented DRDC business processes: All DRDC business processes should be documented and available on a collaborative tool. This documentation could include: the


flow of activities, when each activity needs to be done, its deliverables, its recipients and the Point of Contact (what, when, for whom, by whom). It can include capability management, IP/patent management, program management, etc.;

c. Integration of DRDC business processes: The integration of the different DRDC processes should be documented and made available to all employees. This would help to avoid duplication of efforts and misalignment between business processes;

11. Decision support for S&T security classification—Mechanisms should be provided to DRDC staff to facilitate the identification of the security level of all activities/output/deliverables. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. SMEs for classification/security levels: Specialists in classification/security levels should be developed and easily available by areas of expertise/S&T capabilities; and

b. Life-cycle security guidelines for projects: Life-cycle security guidelines should be documented for programs, projects as well as activities not conducted under a formal project.

5.2.3 KM Goal 3—Preserve critical knowledge

It is essential that DRDC initiates rapid actions so that critical knowledge will be retained in the organization. As a first objective, it is suggested that processes be established to retain, in a persistent way, knowledge at the departure of DRDC employees. This can be achieved through the initiatives proposed hereafter.

12. Internal knowledge retention mechanisms—Mechanisms must be in place to ensure retention of knowledge when employees leave. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. Institutionalization of development of knowledge transfer plan before employees’ departure: A plan of knowledge transfer should be developed each time an employee is leaving the organization, or position. The level of detail of this plan will depend on the time available before the departure and the quantity of knowledge to transfer;

b. DRDC knowledge transfer methodology: DRDC should have a methodology for knowledge transfer to facilitate the capture of knowledge on departure or the indoctrination of new personnel. Furthermore, to take into account the specificity of each domain of expertise, a knowledge transfer process might need to be developed by areas of knowledge/activity; and

c. A knowledge transfer guide book: A knowledge transfer guide book should be available to everyone. It should include a list of potential knowledge transfer tools such as storytelling, job shadowing, exit interviews, case studies, knowledge harvesting1, work profiling, social networking analysis, and/or digital content management.

d. Section/services knowledge transfer plans: Each section/service should develop a knowledge transfer plan for business continuity. Such a plan would:

1 Knowledge harvesting is about asking experienced workers about how to do a task and writing down their insights in the form of job aids or guidelines.


i. Identify knowledge transfer opportunities based on demography analysis, etc.;

ii. Identify the critical knowledge to transfer;

iii. Define a knowledge transfer program;

e. Knowledge retention plans: Each S&T capability and corporate “service” should have a knowledge retention plan.

Finally, new S&T delivery mechanisms will require processes to transfer knowledge with third parties to ensure a mutual understanding of the new approach:

13. External knowledge transfer mechanisms—Mechanisms should exist to ensure the transfer of knowledge from a third party to DRDC and vice-versa. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below;

a. Knowledge transfer methodology for contracts: DRDC has a knowledge transfer methodology (based on S&T areas) for contracts. Each contract should have a knowledge transfer task where knowledge that has been developed during the contract has to be transferred to DRDC employees; and

b. Knowledge transfer / persistence methodology for knowledge access mode: DRDC has a knowledge transfer / persistence methodology while in access mode. When the knowledge is being developed outside our organization, a formalized process must be established to enable easier access and further integration into the existing knowledge sources (which may be many years after it has been developed).

5.2.4 KM Goal 4—Organize and retrieve knowledge

Processes and technology are needed to easily store, organize, and retrieve knowledge in a coherent and structured way. It implies that DRDC should procure and implement tools to support the storage, the organization, and the retrieval of S&T and business knowledge. Potential initiatives associated with this objective are listed hereafter:

14. Knowledge publication dissemination—S&T publication mechanisms should facilitate storage and retrieval of S&T knowledge. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. DRDC publication process and tools for unclassified, protected and classified documents: DRDC needs to have a publication process, including proper tools, for unclassified, protected, and classified publications;

b. Publication processes and tools for scientific material other than reports, proceedings and articles: There should be a publication process and tools for scientific material other than reports, proceedings and articles (e.g., presentations). This is required to be able to manage (record, control and keep track of) all official material developed by DRDC employees;

15. Knowledge structure for S&T and business—Classification mechanisms are in place to facilitate the retrieval of knowledge. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:


a. DRDC Taxonomy: DRDC needs to have a taxonomy which covers S&T capabilities and projects. A taxonomy already exists for the S&T expertise (produced by Chief Scientists and used for publication), however the existing version needs to be expanded to better categorize subdomains. An initiative to develop a taxonomy has been initiated by DSTKIM and it is suggested that: 1) the approach taken by DRDC allows a taxonomy that may evolve in time; 2) the taxonomy should be integrated with the collaborative tool to facilitate search of information; and 3) the taxonomy should be used by the publication process and the tools for the retrieval of documents;

b. Automated tagging tools: Automated tagging tools should be integrated into DRDC collaborative environments (e.g., NEXUS) in complement of manual tagging;

c. Ontology: An ontology, which comprises concepts, attributes, relationships and axioms and provides the meaning of the contents, could be integrated to DRDC collaborative environment tools. The DRDC taxonomy should be eventually evolved into an ontology, providing more advanced functionalities and capabilities;

16. Infrastructure for knowledge organization and retrieval—DRDC must have the required infrastructure to capture, retrieve and share digital knowledge. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. Multimedia infrastructure: Infrastructure to support efficient storage and access of audio, video and documents;

b. Multi-level security infrastructure: DRDC should have the info/infrastructure to work and support repositories of knowledge assets at different levels of classification (unclassified, protected and classified). The required equipment should be available to work at different levels of security in order to facilitate all stages of S&T activities;

17. Digital workplace—DRDC digital workplace environments should be composed of a diversity of computer-based tools available to everyone to record and access knowledge. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. DRDC centres workspaces: Each centre should have a workspace to share information on the DRDC collaborative tool. A workspace specifically designed to enable exchanges and collaboration addressing the specific needs of the different centres;

b. Integration of the different intranets: The previous intranets of the different centres should be integrated into NEXUS;

c. Linkage of DRDC software with its collaborative environment: DRDC software should be able to exchange information with DRDC collaborative tools. For example, the publication tool could be linked to DRDC collaborative tools to provide a list of publications associated to a project or an individual;

d. Linkage of DND software with DRDC collaborative environment: DND software should be able to exchange information with DRDC collaborative tool. For example, GCDOCs should be linked to DRDC collaborative tools;


e. Groups of interest / need-to-know: Groups of interest / need-to-know could be developed to facilitate the identification of who is interested in specific areas of work and who can have access to it. These lists could be used to implement the associated access control for day-to-day work in different collaboration tools and S&T development environments;

f. Working space templates for Communities of Practices (CoP): DRDC could have CoP templates on NEXUS to facilitate the creation and conduct of new CoP;

g. Virtual seminars: DRDC seminars could be recorded and made available to everyone. For example, Matinées Sciences et Technologies could be recorded and put on Nexus for sharing across DRDC;

h. Software development management tools: Software development management tools should be available to DRDC employees for the distributed development and management of prototypes (distributed management of codes/content);

i. Email tools: Outlook is used as a personal information management tool by most of DRDC employees. Emails and calendar bookings are an important source of knowledge related to S&T networkings, origin of ideas, justification of decisions;

j. Knowledge assets repositories: Knowledge asset repositories collect information and knowledge, organize them in a library, resource centre, or online database, and create a directory so that it can be easily located. DRDC needs to have a set of knowledge asset repositories at all levels of classification;

18. Knowledge asset repository management—DRDC needs to have a formal process for the management of its knowledge asset repositories and a robust and efficient infostructure to support it at all levels of classification (unclassified and classified). Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. Acronym list: Acronym list will facilitate the understanding of documents while exchanging information. This list should be easy to find and available to everyone;

b. Process and tools for the management of:

– Data sets: DRDC should have processes and automated tools to support the management of data sets;

– Software: DRDC should have processes and automated tools to support the management of software;

– Physical prototypes: DRDC should have processes and automated tools to support the management of physical prototypes;

– Scenario materials: DRDC should have processes and automated tools to support the management of scenarios;

– Visual material: DRDC should have processes and automated tools to support the management of graphical material (illustrations, images, photos and videos);


19. Traceability of decisions/actions—Traceability mechanisms allow the provision of evidences of origin of works, origin of collaborations and decision rationale. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. Traceability tools for DRDC actions and decisions: Traceability tools support the documentation of decisions and actions. They can be implemented through a mix of advanced semantic search tools, as well as explanation/justification functionalities/fields in existing tools. Specialized requirement traceability tools exist in different software management package; and

b. Traceability mechanisms for DRDC impact on clients: Once S&T knowledge has been delivered to a client and the project is being closed, there is a need to continue monitoring, capturing and formally documenting how that knowledge has been used and how it has impacted the clients.

5.2.5 KM Goal 5—Foster smarter sharing and collaboration within and with others

Knowledge needs to be shared amongst DRDC employees as well as with partners to support efficiency and innovation. A first objective related to this goal would be that mechanisms are available to foster smarter sharing of knowledge. This objective could be fulfilled by the initiatives proposed hereafter:

20. Sharing S&T trends/opportunities—Mechanisms should be in place to facilitate the sharing of S&T trends and networking opportunities. A proposed KM action related to this initiative is:

a. Trip reports: Trip reports should be produced to summarize the main findings/facts/networkings of each business trip;

21. Sharing good practices—Different opportunities for discussions about good practices should be fostered/endorsed by the management. Groups of individuals sharing knowledge over time about a common work practice or a subject area could be done through (from informal to formal mechanisms): lunch and learn, discussion forums, CoPs, workshops, co-development communities, etc. They can be oriented towards different communities, e.g., administrative assistants, managers, etc. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. Islands of excellence (Best Practices): Identify successful teams in knowledge gathering, documentation and reuse, analyze why they are successful and develop best practices based on their approaches;

b. CoPs: CoPs are fostered for specific areas of expertise/work. A CoP is a group of people who share a professional interest, exchange insights and experiences, and learn from one another. It is done over a period of time, though not part of a formally constituted work team or committee. The purpose of a CoP should be well defined. The five basic phases to establishing a successful CoP are: engage, plan, form, launch, and sustain. Roles and responsibilities should be clear and resources/support should be adequate. It is important to make the distinction between the tools to support the CoP (e.g., collaborative environment) and the CoP itself;


22. Sharing of expertise—Mechanisms should be in place to facilitate the sharing of expertise required to foster innovation. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. Cross-fertilization between projects/areas of expertise: Events could be organized for cross-fertilization between projects/areas of expertise such as one-day symposiums, workshops, seminars or brainstorming sessions at the proper level of security with the right individuals from different projects/centres/organizations to discuss a specific subject; and

b. Immersion in other projects/sections/centres: Having employees contributing to other projects would facilitate the cross-fertilization of knowledge amongst projects. Having employees immersed into other sections or centres for limited periods of time would facilitate the cross-fertilization of knowledge between different groups of people.

Another objective to foster smart sharing and collaboration would be to foster DRDC environments (informational, physical and virtual) towards facilitating the sharing of knowledge. Related initiatives to this objective are proposed hereafter:

23. Knowledge sharing policies—Sharing policies should be in place to facilitate the exchange of information between people. A proposed KM action related to this initiative is:

a. Open door policy: An open door policy should be adapted to the DRDC reality. Open door policy (people can walk into any office without a prior appointment) is recognized to be an enabler to share information and knowledge. Within the DRDC context, where Office 2.0 is becoming more common, the organization needs to adapt so it respects requirements related to sensitivity, classification of information and intellectual effort required to conduct R&D;

24. Infra/infostructure for collaboration—Diverse tools should be available to share knowledge in a synchronous as well as asynchronous ways. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. Physical spaces for informal discussions: Physical locations (spaces) should be dedicated to informal discussions. To facilitate exchanges, presentation equipment, whiteboards, internet nodes, notepaper and pens should be made available in shared spaces such as open spaces and other informal meeting amenities, discussion rooms, internet cafés, common dining halls and informal meeting tables;

b. Multimedia tools: Multimedia tools (audio, video recordings) should be available to DRDC employees to preserve and share organizational and S&T memory;

c. Advanced knowledge portals: Knowledge portals integrating new technologies/practices should be introduced into DRDC digital workplace environments to allow day-to-day work, multiple workflows and self-organization (easy customizing of workspaces). Knowledge portals should include groupware, advanced semantic search engines, data mining technologies, content management systems, decision support systems business intelligence and artificial intelligence tools;

d. Social media tools: Social media tools should be made available to facilitate interaction amongst the employees;


e. Real-time interactive tools: Instant messaging tools (such as chat), virtual conferencing tools and online meeting tools (e.g., Webex) should be available to support planned and unplanned communication/collaboration amongst DRDC employees. In fact, online meeting tools should allow last-minute interaction (no need to plan these meetings weeks in advance). These tools should support virtual multi-user whiteboards, co-development of documents, etc.;

f. Internal collaborative tools: Flexible project collaborative tools such as Wikis and Blogs could provide easy mechanisms to document and share living knowledge related to specific S&T projects. Such tools would allow employees to easily capture, share, find (contextual search), consume and update living information of their projects. They would also allow reports to be automatically produces (e.g., to periodically produce updated reports on the evolution of the client requirements);

25. Online training and support—Online training and support could be available to facilitate learning. A proposed KM actions related to this initiative could be:

a. Online training and support: Online training and support should be available for the training and refreshing of fundamental DRDC basic knowledge such as Security, Intellectual Property or Ethics as well as the introduction of new technologies. Serious gaming could become a very effective training mechanism when complemented by some in-class training (involving discussions on real-case exercises). Training material should focus on end users. For example, some NEXUS training material should focus on basic user’s actions, while others could cover more advanced users.

A third objective would be to have an efficient integration of DRDC organizational and client knowledge by new employees. Related initiatives are proposed hereafter:

26. KM attitudes and skills—People could be recruited for their attitudes and skills leading to good KM practises. A KM action related to this initiative could be:

a. Recruitment of people with the right KM attitude and skills: DRDC should recruit people demonstrating attitudes and skills leading to the sharing of knowledge, team work;

27. Introduction material—Introduction material should be available for new employees. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. DRDC introduction material for employees: Introduction material could be developed and maintained up-to-date. DRDC training packages should be continuously updated;

b. DRDC introduction material for clients: Client introduction material should be maintained and made available, if needed;

28. Integration activities for new employees—Activities should be developed to facilitate the integration of new employees. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:


a. Institutionalization of junior employees’ coaching: The coaching of junior employees should be institutionalized. The assignment of experienced staff members to help co-workers develop their skills should be officially recognized;

b. Bootcamp: Intensive set of training activities should be provided to new employees in a short period of time to facilitate their adaptation to the organization; and

c. Study tours: DRDC should organize employee visits to other programs/centres, relevant to their experience, to observe their operations, and discuss with their counterparts. Study tours could speed up the integration of global organizational knowledge.

A final objective related to this goal would relate to the availability of tools to collaborate with external partners. An initiative that can support this objective is proposed hereafter:

29. Facilitating mechanisms for external collaboration—Collaboration tools to facilitate collaboration with partners. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. Employee exchange mechanisms: Employee exchange mechanisms should be known by staff and used as often as possible; and

b. Effective collaboration tools with partners: IT collaboration infrastructure and tools should facilitate interaction with partners. Meetings should not have to be planned weeks/months in advances. If not available on every workstation due to security issues, limited number of workstations with direct access to the internet to run instant collaboration tools should be available.

5.2.6 KM Goal 6—Facilitate use and reuse

DRDC knowledge needs to be of quality and in a format that facilitate its use and reuse. A first step towards this goal would be that existing DRDC knowledge be, when applicable, de facto reused by DRDC members. This objective can be fostered with the initiatives proposed hereafter:

30. Knowledge reach back—DRDC staff should never have to recreate knowledge that has already been created, or give advice to a client without taking into consideration the extended knowledge that exists elsewhere in our organization. Accordingly, employees should have the mechanisms to easily access DRDC knowledge even when this knowledge is developed/located in a different section/centre. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. Internal reach back mechanisms: Internal reach back mechanisms should be used to facilitate access to the knowledge, wherever the location of that knowledge. It would ensure that the highest quality of knowledge is provided to the end user in the shortest period of time. It would also enable the access of knowledge developed in a specific centre by other centre employees (e.g., a CORA employee embedded with the client); and

b. External reach back mechanisms: Knowledge transfer should always be planned and executed before the departure of an employee. In cases where it is not possible to transfer critical knowledge prior to the departure of an individual, different reach back mechanisms should be developed to access the employee that left the section/service or the organization.


If the person has not left the organization, then an internal reach back mechanism can be used. However, when the person has left the organization (e.g., retired), other mechanisms, such as 90-day contracts, could be used to access the knowledge.

Another objective to facilitate the use and reuse of knowledge would be that the provision of DRDC knowledge is fully adapted to the clients. This can only be achieved while considering the elements below:

– Knowledge transfer mechanism has to appropriately “fit” the kind of knowledge and task it is intended for;

– The receiving team has to have enough “absorptive capacity,” which means that a minimum of knowledge is required a priori to absorb the new knowledge. It is then key to know what is the level of knowledge of specific clients that DRDC has to interact with to adapt the knowledge to be delivered. If not done correctly, the client may never be in a position to exploit correctly the knowledge provided to him; and

– Different methods need to be used to enable different types of knowledge to be shared. The right method to use will depend on the context, the objective of sharing knowledge and the complexity of the knowledge itself.

An initiative supporting this objective can be as proposed hereafter:

31. Mechanisms for S&T knowledge delivery—DRDC should have various tools to deliver the S&T knowledge which corresponds to the specificities of its different clients. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. Client knowledge transfer Lessons Learned (LL): LL on efficient ways to transfer knowledge to the clients should be captured and made accessible to everyone;

b. Case studies on client knowledge transfer: Case studies could be developed to include: customer issues, project problems, trouble shooting, lessons learned, decision rationale or best practices. They should cover these five key principles of communication [44]:

i. What (is the message)?

ii. To whom (audience)?

iii. By whom (messenger)?

iv. How (transfer method)?

v. With what expected impact (evaluation)?

c. Emphasis on client perspective in the review process: To improve the readability of the documents produced specifically for a military client, these documents should be reviewed by a S&T expert in the area as well as someone with the client background. Accordingly, a client’s perspective review of S&T deliverables could be done for client documents such as Scientific Letter (SL); and


d. Diversity of S&T knowledge delivery mechanisms: New ways of delivery S&T knowledge can be developed and used. Reports are sometimes not satisfactory from the client’s perspective. New set of tools to deliver the knowledge to the client in the most efficient way is needed, considering that there might be a long period of time before the knowledge is being used by the client. These complementary tools can take diverse forms, such as videos, presentation materials, etc.

5.2.7 KM Goal 7—Collective responsibility

Becoming an outstanding knowledge organization requires that employees are engaged in the management of knowledge. This can only be achieved if DRDC employees are supported in the management of their knowledge. This objective will require different initiatives and some are proposed hereafter:

32. Managers should support the sharing of knowledge—Managers can encourage employee’s participation in activities of knowledge sharing between teams/projects/centres/organizations, allowing the development of a learning culture. Such activities can be considered as learning opportunities. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. Time allocation for knowledge sharing: Management should recognize and support time for knowledge sharing;

b. Managers support knowledge sharing initiatives: Managers should encourage employees to establish/participate in knowledge sharing initiatives, such as CoPs;

c. Managers provide internal resources to share knowledge: Managers should provide internal resources to support the conduct of knowledge sharing initiatives;

33. Informal engagement teams—People with competencies and enthusiasm relative to knowledge management/sharing should be identified within the organization to become knowledge management energy catalyzer (mavens). A KM action related to this initiative could be:

a. Informal engagement teams: Informal engagement teams should be created within the organization.

A second objective would be that people be assessed/rewarded based on their contribution to KM. The three (3) initiatives hereafter have been identified relatively to this objective:

34. Assessment of individual contributions to KM—Individual can be assessed based on the way they manage knowledge. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. Assessment of KM and sharing in the Performance Agreement (PA): Expected behaviours on knowledge management and knowledge sharing can be identified as one of the required competencies in the PA. This would emphasize the responsibility that everyone has to document, share and reuse knowledge, as well as to connect people/projects with complementary/relevance knowledge and experience;


b. Assessment of managers’ support to KM: Managers should be assessed based on the contribution of their employees to knowledge strategy. Managers supporting KM initiatives/efforts would then be assessed and recognized accordingly;

35. KM incentives—DRDC should reward substantial contributions to KM Strategy and KM good practices. KM actions related to this initiative could as mentioned below:

a. Rewards for KM good practices: Knowledge sharing should be recognized and rewarded. The paradigm needs to shift from “knowledge is power” to “sharing knowledge is power”;

36. Assessment of the management of knowledge in projects—Projects should be assessed based on the way the knowledge is managed, looking specifically at the knowledge generated and used in the project. A KM action related to this initiative could be:

a. Assessment of knowledge management in projects: Projects should be assessed based on the quality of their knowledge management and sharing amongst and outside the team members.

5.2.8 KM Goal 8—Collective governance

A successful KM strategy will require that KM governance be well-defined, known, and applied by everyone in the organization. This requires that KM initiatives be known by DRDC employees. The initiative hereafter can support this objective:

37. KM initiatives information—Mechanisms should be set in place to inform the employees about KM good practices and initiatives. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:

a. KM vitrine: DRDC should have a KM space on its collaborative tool. The vitrine could be used to consistently inform employees about how KM can/have improve(d) their performance and mutually benefit the organization. The establishment of various communication channels (i.e., newsletter) to convey the significance, processes and achievements of KM would also be beneficial;

b. KM strategy dissemination: KM strategy should be presented to DRDC employees. This can be done by presentations at different centres or by using virtual or collaborative tools. To avoid some undesirable side effects of the global dissemination, such as the perception that it represents additional work that is imposed by the high-level management, an approach where a local KM champion with a representative manager could present the KM strategy explaining what it really means considering the local specificities; and

c. KM suggestion box: DRDC should have a KM suggestion box as part of its KM vitrine.

A last objective for this goal relates to the importance that KM tools evolve according to the organizational needs. This objective can be covered by the initiatives proposed hereafter:

38. KM management—All KM activities should be managed even if they are conducted as part of an initiative aiming at something else than the improvement of KM. Proposed KM actions related to this initiative are listed below:


a. DRDC KM champion: A DRDC KM champion should be identified. The owner of a KM strategy is usually at the top level of the organization;

b. DRDC KM advisory committee: DRDC should establish a KM advisory committee. The KM advisory committee will be assessing the KM capabilities of the organization and provide recommendations for orientation of KM initiatives. It should be composed of employees from different areas (functions/centres) of the organization;

c. KM leads for initiatives: DRDC should have a KM lead person, team or organization for each KM initiatives. Considering that some KM initiatives will be leveraged on existing initiatives that are not necessarily focussed on KM, it is necessary to identify one employee involved in these initiatives with the responsibility to keep the initiative aligned with the KM strategy;

d. KM initiatives assessment: All KM initiatives should be monitored and assessed;

e. KM assessment of DRDC business processes: All DRDC business processes should include an assessment of the way they manage knowledge;

39. Strategic support to KM—KM should be considered as a strategic activity of the organization. Accordingly, a KM action related to this initiative could be:

a. KM is part of the S&T strategy: The S&T strategy should emphasize the role of KM in the achievement of the mission.

5.3 Next steps

It is recommended that following the approval of a KM strategy for DRDC, a KM champion be identified and the KM Advisory Board be established to initiate the implementation effort. The review and prioritization of the different KM initiatives/actions proposed in the document should then be performed to develop a KM roadmap for the following three (3) to five (5) years. It is recommended that the prioritization of the different initiatives should consider their strategic and operational impacts as well as the level of effort for their implementation. A first assessment (presented at Annex A) of these different criteria has been conducted with the help of some key contributors in our organization.

The approach used at the time of the evaluation was to assess the strategic, operational impact as well as the level of effort of each identified KM actions, and then to aggregate these assessment results at the initiative level, using, for each criterion, the highest assessment result of all KM actions under a specific initiative. An overview of the obtained results are presented in Figure 8.

DRDC-RD

Once reviinitiativesprocesses with other

DDC-2019-D0

iewed and sein order to rin isolation

r business act

034

F

elected, the reduce work from all the ivities.

Figure 8: KM

KM actions burden. Thisother process

M initiatives o

should be li is in line wises. It is real

overview.

inked, as muith the fact thlly important

uch as possihat we don’t

to embed th

ble, with exwant to have

hose KM acti

51

isting e KM ivities


6 Conclusion

As a S&T organization focussed on providing knowledge and technology advantage to support defence and security operations, knowledge is clearly the most important asset and product of DRDC. This has been exacerbated, over the last decade, by the blooming knowledge economy and the exponential growth in data generation created by the pervasiveness of computer-based systems and the availability of networks. Besides, the 2013 DRDC S&T strategy identifies knowledge management as “an enabler to provide trusted access to S&T knowledge, expertise and know-how, wherever it exists, and to deliver these in a timely fashion for maximum impact.” In addition, the Open Government initiative put the emphasis on the GoC intent to “… maximize access to federally funded scientific research to encourage greater collaboration and engagement with the scientific community, the private sector, and the public.” These contextual elements combined with previous efforts and the need to continuously improve the delivery of its S&T products resulted in the mandate to propose a realistic KM strategy for DRDC.

Consequently, this Reference Document is proposing a KM strategy adapted for DRDC needs and context which aims at addressing the main the KM challenges perceived within the organization:

Knowledge lost, since it is not efficiently and systematically captured, stored, organized and difficult to retrieve;

Knowledge silos, since sharing is often limited within the organizational structure, programs or clients;

Limited reuse of knowledge, since its exploitation is not effective; and

Limited infra/infostructure that is inadequate for the particular context of DRDC.

The proposed strategy is essential to ensure that the vision, the context and the challenges are shared within the organization and the necessary actions are defined to meet the expectations. The work conducted to develop a KM strategy for DRDC led to the identification of the following eight KM goals:

1. Know what we know—DRDC employees need to be aware of the knowledge existing within DRDC;

2. Capture critical knowledge—All DRDC critical knowledge needs to be captured;

3. Preserve critical knowledge—Critical DRDC knowledge has to be retained within the organization;

4. Organize and retrieve knowledge—Processes and technology need to be in place to easily store, organize and retrieve knowledge in a coherent way;

5. Foster smart sharing and collaboration within and with others—DRDC knowledge needs to be shared amongst the employees as well as with partners and the public to support efficiency and innovation;

6. Facilitate use and reuse—DRDC knowledge has to be of high quality and in a format that facilitate its use and reuse by employees and clients;

7. Maintain collective responsibility—DRDC employees need to be engaged into the management of knowledge; and

8. Assure collective governance—KM governance has to be well-defined, known, and applied by everyone.


As a cornerstone of the proposed strategy, the KM vision aims at fostering the development and the integration of the required knowledge through the access, build and collaborate modes leading to the provision of timely S&T advice to CAF and DND by ensuring that:

– Our S&T knowledge is accessible, nationally & internationally recognized, and highly used to foster innovation and inform decision makers.

Resulting from the vision, the proposed KM principles intend to orient the implementation efforts by reinforcing DRDC to be:

Seeking for S&T excellence through the development of its people, processes and infra/infostructures;

Valuing its knowledge in making it available and easily findable;

Empowering the “need to share” to enable those that “need to know”; and

Managing its S&T knowledge to facilitate its exploitation by those that need it.

To support the implementation of the strategy, a KM framework is suggested which represents the set of high-level components that it must be considered. These components correspond to the pillars used for the definition of the implementation goals:

The stakeholders;

The critical knowledge assets;

The repositories of knowledge assets;

The processes; and

The context.

A rigorous follow-on of the proposed strategy implementation will be necessary to maximize the chance of success which will be performed through regular assessment aiming at answering questions to estimate how far the organization is from the desired end state. For the same purpose, a risk mitigation approach is proposed and centred around: 1) a tight alignment with the strategic and operational objectives and metrics of the organization; 2) a centralized direction with a decentralized implementation and accountability; 3) a progressive and targeted introduction of tools and processes; and 4) the establishment of a quality assurance system.

The practical implementation of such a strategy is far more than the elaboration of a set of processes or tools; it implies a profound change of culture within the organization. Significantly evolving an organizational culture is not an easy task; it takes years, even decades, combined with a very targeted, consistent and methodical approach. In addition, considering the diversity of employees within DRDC, in terms of background, working areas, culture, generations and roles, it is illusory to think that the same tool or approach would engage everyone the same way.

Consequently, to effectively and efficiently implement the proposed KM strategy, including the necessary cultural changes, it is recommended, as priority actions, to:

1. Identify a KM champion within the organization that will be the standard bearer of the initiative;

2. Establish a KM Advisory Board (at director level) that will be responsible for advising the stakeholders and supervising the implementation efforts;


3. Establish a task force (composed of employees from different groups and levels) that are sensitive to KM and who will be responsible for defining, prioritizing and directing the implementation of the different KM initiatives/actions (based on the elements proposed in this Reference Document); and

4. Develop a KM roadmap, covering a horizon of three (3) to five (5) years, as the main work plan to guide de stakeholders.

It is recommended that the roadmap should be the main communication tool to engage stakeholders and share the way ahead. In addition, it must contain a good diversity of tools that should be gradually introduced to different groups based on the specific profiles. Then, based on the lessons learned, these tools should be adjusted before being deployed to the larger community to take into account the organizational context and priorities. Furthermore, it is important that KM activities not be conducted in isolation and be embedded into existing business process activities or initiatives to maximize their impact.

A sound and rigorous management of its knowledge is fundamental to any modern organization and all the more for DRDC since it's at the core of its functions. The current evolution of the organization mandate, through the implementation and management of the IDEaS program, only stress the need for a KM strategy which will lead to actionable policies and effective initiatives and actions.


References

[1] National Defence (2013), Science and technology in action: delivering results for Canada’s defence and security, Defence and Security S&T Strategy, Cat. No. D69-11/2013E-PDF, ISBN: 978-1-100-22686-6.

[2] Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (online), Canada’s Action Plan on Open Government 2014–16, http://open.canada.ca/en/content/canadas-action-plan-open-government-2014-16, (Access date: 27 February 2017).

[3] Lu, H., and Lee, H-I. (2016), Case study on four patterns of knowledge conversion: behavioural competency and social learning theory perspectives, Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 14(3), pp. 270–279.

[4] Frost, A. (online), KM from A to Z—Knowledge Management Tools, http://www.knowledge-management-tools.net/, (Access date: 27 February 2017).

[5] Office of the Auditor General of British Columbia (online), Why think of knowledge as a strategic asset?, http://www.bcauditor.com/online/pubs/552/492, (Access date: 27 February 2017).

[6] Kols, A. (2004), Managing Knowledge to Improve Reproductive Health Programs, MAQ Paper No. 5, December 2004, , https://www.k4health.org/sites/default/files/KMforRH_2004.pdf(Access date: 27 February 2017).

[7] Rowley, J. (2007), The wisdom hierarchy representations of the DIKW hierarchy, Journal of Information and Communication Sciences, Vol. 33, Issue 2, pp. 163–180.

[8] Hajric, E. (online), The SECI Model and Knowledge Conversion, http://www.knowledge-management-tools.net/knowledge-conversion.html, (Access date: 27 February 2017).

[9] Güldenberg, S., and Leitner, K.H. (2008), Strategy Processes in Research and Development Organisations: Why Knowledge Management is still more isolated than integrated, OKLC 2008, Copenhagen.

[10] Hajric, E. (online), Building knowledge management frameworks and models, http://www.knowledge-management-tools.net/knowledge-management-frameworks.html, (Access date: 27 February 2017).

[11] Bouthillier, F., and Shearer, K. (2002), Understanding knowledge management and information management: the need for an empirical perspective, Information Research, Vol. 8 No. 1, October 2002.

[12] Dimick, S. (2015). How KM drives innovation.pdf—The conference board of Canada, Web seminar presented on 21 April 2015, The Conference Board of Canada.

[13] Zarinpoudh, F., Sychowski, S.V., and Sperling, J. (2007), Effective Knowledge Transfer & Exchange for Nonprofit Organizations—A framework, Imagine Canada.


[14] Roth, J. (2003), Enabling knowledge creation: learning from an R&D organization, Enabling knowledge creation: learning from an R&D organization, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol.7, No. 1, pp. 32–48.

[15] Oliver, S., and Kandadi, K. R. (2006), How to develop knowledge culture in organizations? A multiple case study of large distributed organizations, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 10, No. 4.

[16] Hubert, C., and Lemons, D. (online), APQC’s Levels of Knowledge Management MaturitySM, APQC, 23 July 2015, https://www.apqc.org/knowledge-base/documents/apqcs-levels-knowledge-management-maturity, (Access date: 27 February 2017).

[17] Becerra-Fernandez, I., and Sabherwal, R. (2010), Knowledge Management:Systems and Processes, Second Edition, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.

[18] Coulson-Thomas, C. (2013), Transforming Knowledge Management. Speech to Dubai Global Convention on Business Excellence, Burj Al Arab, Dubai, 1 May 2013.

[19] Garder, H. (online), Smart Collaboration: Breaking Down Silos, Harvard Business Review Webinars, 19 October 2016, https://hbr.org/webinar/2016/09/smart-collaboration-breaking-down-silos, (Access date: 27 February 2017).

[20] Gardner, H. (online), Stop blocking collaboration in your firm, Harvard Business Review, 18 February 2016, . http://www.leadershipreview.net/blocking-collaboration(Access date: 27 February 2017)

[21] The Conference Board of Canada (2015), Driving Knowledge Management for Innovation, Briefing April 2015.

[22] Nieves, J., Quintana, A., and Osorio, J. (2016), Organizational knowledge and collaborative human resource practises as determinants of innovation. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 237–245.

[23] Suh, W., Sohn, J.H.D., and Kwak, J.Y. (2004), Knowledge management as enabling R&D innovation in high tech industry: the case of SAIT, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 8, No. 6, pp. 5–15.

[24] Paragon Solutions (online), 3 Easy Steps to Creating a Knowledge Management Strategy, http://www.consultparagon.com/blog/3-easy-steps-to-creating-a-knowledge-management-strategy, (Access date: 27 February 2017).

[25] Hobert, K. A. (2015), Revive Knowledge Management With the Digital Workplace, Gartner.

[26] APQC (online), Knowledge Management, https://www.apqc.org/knowledge-management, (Access date: 27 February 2017).

[27] The Conference Board of Canada (online), Council on Information and Knowledge Management, http://www.conferenceboard.ca/networks/ksen/default.aspx, (Access date: 27 February 2017).


[28] The Knowledge Management Institute of Canada (online), KMIC, http://www.kminstitute.ca/, (Access date: 27 February 2017).

[29] Government of Canada (online), Government of Canada (GC) Information Management (IM) Strategy, https://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/im-gi/ims-sgi/ims-sgi-eng.asp, (Access date: 27 February 2017).

[30] Defence Science and Technology Organization (DSTO), Information Management & Technology (IM&T) Strategic Plan 2013–2014, Department of Defence of the Australian Government. (27 February 2017).

[31] Dstl (2012), Integrated ICT & Information Management Strategy 2012–2017, DSTL/DOC65387, 18 June 2012.

[32] HM Government (2016), Knowledge Principles for Government, UK, July 2016.

[33] Anderson, A. (2015), HQ SACT CIS Support IKM Model, presentation material from IKM Staff Officer.

[34] Deloitte (2016), The 2016 Deloitte Millennial Survey: Winning over the next generation of leaders, https://www2.deloitte.com/global/en/pages/about-deloitte/articles/millennialsurvey.html, (Access date: 27 February 2017).

[35] Mertens, R. (2015), Knowledge Management Status Report—March 2015, DRDC working paper.

[36] National Defence (2017), Strong Secure Engaged Canada’s Defence Policy, 2017.

[37] Greiner, M. E., Böhmann, T., and Krcmar, H. (2007), A strategy for knowledge management, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol.11, No. 6, pp. 3–15.

[38] DRDC (2015), DRDC overview, DRDC generic presentation, Agency PPT FINAL Generic ENG—22 Dec 2015 Final.pptx.

[39] Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces (2016), 2016–2017 Report on Plans and Priorities of the DND and the CAF, Cat. No. D3-30E-PDF, ISSN 2292-3888.

[40] DRDC (online), Defence Research and Development Canada, http://descartes.drdc-rddc.gc.ca/glance/default.aspx, (Access date: 27 February 2017).

[41] Knowledge sharing toolkit wiki (online), Knowledge maps, http://www.kstoolkit.org/Knowledge+Maps, (Access date: 27 February 2017).

[42] Macintosh, A. (online), Position Paper on Knowledge Asset Management, http://www.aiai.ed.ac.uk/~alm/kam.html, (Access date: 27 February 2017).

[43] Ermine, J.-L. (online), Methods and Tools for Knowledge Management in Research Centres, Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 293–306, http://www.ejkm.com/volume8/issue3, (Access date: 27 February 2017).


[44] Reardon, R., Lavis, J., and Gibson, J. (2006), Research to Practice: A Knowledge Transfer Planning Guide, Institute for Work & Health.


Annex A DRDC S&T capability taxonomy

1 Physical Sciences 1.1 Platform Physical Protection 1.2 Energetic Materials and Systems 1.3 Weapon Systems and Effects 1.4 Platform Performance 1.5 Signature Management 1.6 Underwater Sensing and Effectors

2 Electromagnetic Sciences

2.1 Magnetic Sensing 2.2 EO Electronic Warfare 2.3 RF Electronic Warfare 2.4 Radar & Radar Signal Processing 2.5 Electro-optic Sensing 2.6 Sensor Data Exploitation and Fusion 2.7 Space Systems & Sensing

3 Information Systems

3.1 Command and Control 3.2 Cybersecurity 3.3 Intelligence and Situational Awareness 3.4 Autonomous Systems 3.5 Information Technology Enablers for Decision Support & Intelligence and Situational

Awareness

4 Health Sciences 4.1 Personnel CBR Defence 4.2 Blast Protection and Injury 4.3 Military Medicine 4.4 CBR Medical Counter Measures

5 Social and Behavioral Sciences

5.1 Human Effectiveness 5.2 Organizational and Operational Effectiveness 5.3 Resiliency and Mental Health 5.4 Selection and Assessment 5.5 Social and Cultural Influence 5.6 Social Policy Research

6 Operational Research and Analysis 6.1 Operational Research / Operational Analysis (OR/OA) for Enterprise Resource Management 6.2 OR/OA for Force Development / Concept Development and Experimentation (CD&E) /

Capability Production (CP) 6.3 OR/OA Force Generation & Employment


6.4 Workforce Analytics 6.5 Strategic Analysis 6.6 Analysis of S&T intelligence

7 Other

7.1 Military Communications


Annex B Assessment of the KM initiatives

Table 2: Template for the assessment of KM initiatives.

7 Lessons Learned Demanding (< 3 months) Essential Ease operations Not currently planned

9 Idea Incubators Challenging (to be determined) Direct Ease operations Not currently planned

19 Traceability of decisions/actions Challenging (to be determined) Direct Neutral Not currently planned

20 Sharing of S&T

trends/opportunities

Limited (< 5 days) Direct Ease operations Not currently planned

Essential Ease operations

23 Knowledge sharing policies Challenging (to be determined) Indirect Ease operations Not currently planned

25 On‐line training and support Challenging (to be determined) Indirect Ease operations Not currently planned

26 KM attitudes and skills Demanding (< 3 months) Indirect Ease operations Not currently planned

33 Informal engagement teams Demanding (< 3 months) Direct Ease operations Not currently planned

35 KM incentives Limited (< 5 days) Indirect Ease operations Not currently planned

Projects are assessed based on

the KM perspective

36 Assessment of the management of

knowledge in projects

Demanding (< 3 months) Indirect Ease operations Not currently planned

39 Strategic support to KM Limited (< 5 days) Essential Improve operations Some activities under implementation

Implementation effort Strategic

impact

Operational impact Current status

1 Information web pages

Essential Ease operations

4 Publication lists

KM Goals

Title

KM Objectives # KM

Initiative

Names of KM Initiatives

Some activities under implementation

3 News feeds Demanding (< 3 months) Direct Ease operations Not currently planned

Demanding (< 3 months) Essential Ease operations Some activities under pilot

2 Dashboards Demanding (< 3 months) Direct Ease operations

Some activities under pilot

8 DRDC Critical Knowledge Inventory Demanding (< 3 months) Essential Improve operations Not currently planned


KM Goal 2 ‐

Capture

critical

knowledge

DRDC employees have

mechanisms to facilitate the

capture of knowledge

6 Global S&T awareness Demanding (< 3 months) Direct Ease operations

KM Goal 1 ‐

Know what

we know

DRDC people have the tools to

increase their awareness of

DRDC expertise / projects /

collaborations / influence Challenging (to be determined) Direct Ease operations Not currently planned

5 Knowledge map Challenging (to be determined)

KM Goal 3 ‐

Preserve

critical

knowledge

Processes are in place to retain,

in a persistent way, DRDC

knowledge at the departure of

DRDC employees

12 Internal knowledge retention

mechanisms

Essential Improve operations Some activities planned

11 Decision Support for S&T Security

classification

Demanding (< 3 months) Limited Improve operations Not currently planned

DRDC businesses are

documented and accessible by

everyone

10 DRDC business documentation Demanding (< 3 months)

Challenging (to be determined) Essential Improve operations Not currently planned

Processes are in place to transfer

knowledge with third parties

13 External knowledge transfer

mechanisms

Demanding (< 3 months) Direct

Improve operations Some activities under implementation

15 Knowledge Structure for S&T and

business

Challenging (to be determined) Essential Improve operations Some activities planned

Improve operations Not currently planned

14 Knowledge Publication

Dissemination

Challenging (to be determined) Essential

Some activities planned

17 Digital workplace Challenging (to be determined) Essential Improve operations Some activities under implementation

16 Infrastructure for Knowledge

Organisation and Retrieval

Challenging (to be determined) Essential Improve operations

Improve operations Some activities planned

KM Goal 5 ‐

Foster smart

sharing and

collaboration

within and

with others

Mechanisms are available to

foster smart sharing of

knowledge 21 Sharing of Good Practices Challenging (to be determined)

18 Knowledge asset repositories

management

Challenging (to be determined) Essential

KM Goal 4 ‐

Organize and

retrieve

knowledge

DRDC tools support storage,

organisation and retrieval of S&T

as well as business knowledge

DRDC environments

(informational, physical and

virtual) facilitate sharing of

knowledge

24 Infra/info structure for Challenging (to be determined) Essential


22 Sharing of Expertise Demanding (< 3 months) Essential Improve operations Not currently planned

KM Goal 6 ‐

Facilitate use

and reuse

DRDC knowledge is used by

DRDC members

30 Knowledge reachback

Not currently planned

DRDC employees have the tools

to collaborate with external

partners

29 Facilitators for external

collaboration

Challenging (to be determined) Essential Improve operations Some activities under implementation

28 Integration activities for new

employee

Demanding (< 3 months) Essential Improve operations

Our new employees efficiently

integrate DRDC organizational as

well as DRDC client knowledge

27 Introduction material Demanding (< 3 months) Essential Ease operations Some activities under pilot

KM Goal 8 ‐

Collective

governance

KM initiatives are known by

DRDC employees

37 KM initiatives information Demanding (< 3 months) Limited Improve operations

Essential Improve operations

People are assessed/rewarded

based on their contribution to

the KM

34 Assessment of KM individual

contributions

Demanding (< 3 months) Direct Complexify

operations

KM Goal 7 ‐

Collective

responsibility

DRDC people are supported in

the management of their

knowledge

32 Managers support the sharing of

knowledge

Demanding (< 3 months)


KM tools are evolving according

to the organizational needs

38 KM Management Challenging (to be determined) Essential Improve operations Not currently planned



Limited Improve operations Not currently planned

Demanding (< 3 months) Essential Improve operations Not currently planned

Provision of DRDC knowledge is

adapted to DND/security clients

31 Mechanisms for S&T knowledge

delivery

Demanding (< 3 months)

Improve operations Some activities under implementation


Bibliography

Directorate Science and Technology Policy (2003), Knowledge Management Strategy and Framework, Defence Research and Development Canada, Technical Note, DRDC-CORPORATE-TN 2003-002.

Gauvin, M., Ferland, Y., Lecocq, R., Roy, M.-C., and Lemieux, M.-E. (2004), Investigation of the Meaning of Knowledge Creation, Learning and Collaboration in the Canadian Military, 9th ICCRTS, Copenhagen, Denmark, September 14–16, 2004.

Ihrig, M., and Macmillan, I. (2015), Managing Mission-Critical Knowledge, Harvard Business Review, January–February 2015, pp. 81–88.

Isenor, A. W. (2003), The Importance of Metadata in System Development and IKM, Defence R&D Canada – Atlantic, Technical Memorandum, DRDC-Atlantic-TM-2003-011.

Masys, A., and Vallerand, A. (2013), Concept Paper: Organizational Change and Knowledge Management: Designing a knowledge culture within Federal Policing in Canada, Defence R&D Canada – Centre for Security Science, Letter Report, DRDC-CSS-LR-2013-040.

McIntyre, S. (2000), Why do we need Knowledge Management? Working document.

McIntyre, S. (2002), Knowledge Management in Defence R&D Canada. A Knowledge Management Audit, Directorate Science and Technology Policy, Technical Memorandum, DRDC-TM-2002-003.

McIntyre, S. (2008), Creating and Sustaining Meta-Organizational Memory: A Case Study, Defence R&D Canada – Centre for Security Science, Scientific Literature, DRDC-CSS-SL-2008-05.

McIntyre, S. (2015), Director Science and Technology Knowledge and Information Management Strategic Plan for 2020.

McIntyre, S., Dalkir, K. (2013), Case Study: Measuring the Impact of Knowledge Management Activities on Program Outcomes, Defence R&D Canada – Centre for Security Science, Scientific Literature, DRDC-CSS-SL-2013-002.

McIntyre, S.G., Gauvin, M., and Waruszynski, B. (2003), Knowledge Management in the Military Context, Canadian Military Journal, Spring 2003.

McIntyre, S., and Kaminska, K. (2011), Capturing Lessons that should be Learned: An After Event Review for Whole-of-Government Security Planning and Operations. European Conference on Knowledge Management, Passau, Germany, September 1–2, 2011.

Mertens, R. (2015a), A Perspective on Obstacles and Potential Solutions for DRDC Knowledge Management, Defence Research and Development Canada, Scientific Letter, DRDC-RDDC-2015-L170.

Mertens, R. (2015b), Knowledge Strategy Development DRAFT 2015: How do you move from a culture of power-and-secrecy to one of willingness-and-freedom to collaborate? DRDC working document.


Mertens, R. (2015c), Knowledge Management Status Report—March 2015, DRDC working paper.

PWC Consulting (2002), Departement of National Defence—Knowledge Management Criteria Study, September 2002.

Simard, A., and Jourdeuil, P. (2012), Knowledge services: A synthesis of best practices, Defence Research and Development Canada, Technical Report, DRDC-CORPORATE-TR-2012-011.

Simard, A., and Jourdeuil, P. (2012), Knowledge Manageability—A New Paradigm, Defence Research and Development Canada, Scientific Literature, DRDC-CORPORATE-SL-2012-008.

Verdon, J. (2011), Knowledge Governance at DRDC for a culture of innovation and collaboration—Office of the Chief Scientist, DRDC’s RDEC September 2011 presentation.

Waruszynski, B. T. (2000), The knowledge revolution—A Literature Review, Defence Research and Development Canada, Technical Memorandum, DRDC-HQ-TR-2000-002.

Waruszynski, B. T. (2001), Working Towards A Knowledge Investment Strategy—An Analytical Overview of the Science and Technology Community, Defence Research and Development Canada, Directorate of Science and Technology Policy, Technical Memorandum, DRDC-CORPORATE-TM-2000-003.

Waruszynski, B.T. (2001), Knowledge Management within the Canadian Defence Environment, Defence Research and Development Canada, Directorate of Science and Technology Policy, Technical Memorandum, DRDC-TM-2001-008.

Waruszynski, B. T. (2003), Enabling Collaborative Capability through Virtual Teamwork… The Way Ahead, Defence R&D Canada, Technical Memorandum, DRDC-Ottawa-TM 2003-217.

Waruszynski, B T. (2004), Work Team Strategies, Enhancing Team Development and Organizational Performance – A Foundation Report for Integrated Capability Engineering Teams, Defence R&D Canada – Ottawa, DRDC-Ottawa-TM 2004-225.


List of symbols/abbreviations/acronyms/initialisms

ADM(HR)

ADM(IE)

ADM(PA)

ADM(S&T)

APQC

CAF

CBoC

CIKM

CoP

DIK

DND

Assistant Deputy Minister (Human Resources)

Assistant Deputy Minister (Infrastructure and Environment)

Assistant Deputy Minister (Public Affairs)

Assistant Deputy Minister (Science & Technology)

American Productivity & Quality Center

Canadian Armed Forces

Conference Board of Canada

Council on Information and Knowledge Management

Communities of Practice

Data/Information/Knowledge

Department of National Defence

DRDC

DSCDS

DST

Defence Research and Development Canada

Defence Subject Classification and Disposition System

Defence Science and Technology

DSTKIM

Dstl

FCM

GC

GoC

HR

HRM

ICT

IFAD

IKM

IM

IM&T

IMS

KM

LL

MCM

Director Science and Technology Knowledge and Information Management

Defence Science and Technology Organization

Federation of Canadian Municipalities

Gestion de la connaissance

Government of Canada

Human Resource

Human Resource Management

Integrated Information and Communications Technology

International Fund for Agricultural Development

Information and Knowledge Management

Information Management

Information Management & Technology

Information Management Strategy

Knowledge Management

Lessons Learned

Federation of Canadian Municipalities


MOU

NGOs

NRC

NRC KMAC

OGDs

OR/OA

PA

PDA

POC

PSPC

RDDC

RDEC

SACT

S&T

UN

WIPO

Memorandum Of Understanding

Non-governmental Organizations

National Research Council

NRC Knowledge Management Advisory Committee

Other Government Departments

Operational Research / Operational Analysis

Performance Agreement

Professional Development Assessment

Point of Contact

Public Services Procurement Canada

Recherche et développement pour la défense Canada

Research and Development Executive Committee

Supreme Allied Commander Transformation

Science & Technology

United Nations

World Intellectual Property Organization

DOCUMENT CONTROL DATA *Security markings for the title, authors, abstract and keywords must be entered when the document is sensitive

1. ORIGINATOR (Name and address of the organization preparing the document. A DRDC Centre sponsoring a contractor's report, or tasking agency, is entered in Section 8.)

Corporate OfficeADM(S&T) / DRDC CorporateNDHQ (Carling), 60 Moodie Drive, Building 7Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0K2Canada

2a. SECURITY MARKING (Overall security marking of the document including special supplemental markings if applicable.)

CAN UNCLASSIFIED

2b. CONTROLLED GOODS

NON-CONTROLLED GOODS DMC A

3. TITLE (The document title and sub-title as indicated on the title page.)

Proposed knowledge management strategy and action plan for Defence Research andDevelopment Canada

4. AUTHORS (Last name, followed by initials – ranks, titles, etc., not to be used)

Bélanger, M.; Gilbert, B.; McIntyre, S.

5. DATE OF PUBLICATION (Month and year of publication of document.)

May 2019

6a. NO. OF PAGES (Total pages, including Annexes, excluding DCD, covering and verso pages.)

75

6b. NO. OF REFS (Total references cited.)

69

7. DOCUMENT CATEGORY (e.g., Scientific Report, Contract Report, Scientific Letter.)

Reference Document

8. SPONSORING CENTRE (The name and address of the department project office or laboratory sponsoring the research and development.)

Corporate OfficeADM(S&T) / DRDC CorporateNDHQ (Carling), 60 Moodie Drive, Building 7Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0K2Canada

9a. PROJECT OR GRANT NO. (If appropriate, the applicable research and development project or grant number under which the document was written. Please specify whether project or grant.)

9b. CONTRACT NO. (If appropriate, the applicable number under which the document was written.)

10a. DRDC PUBLICATION NUMBER (The official document number by which the document is identified by the originating activity. This number must be unique to this document.)

DRDC-RDDC-2019-D034

10b. OTHER DOCUMENT NO(s). (Any other numbers which may be assigned this document either by the originator or by the sponsor.)

11a. FUTURE DISTRIBUTION WITHIN CANADA (Approval for further dissemination of the document. Security classification must also be considered.)

11b. FUTURE DISTRIBUTION OUTSIDE CANADA (Approval for further dissemination of the document. Security classification must also be considered.)

12. KEYWORDS, DESCRIPTORS or IDENTIFIERS (Use semi-colon as a delimiter.)

Knowledge Management

13. ABSTRACT (When available in the document, the French version of the abstract must be included here.)

The Office of the Chief Scientist was tasked to investigate and recommend a strategy forKnowledge Management (KM) for Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC). A KM

strategy can be developed as a KM vision and a list of KM principles that will support the implementation of this vision. Those two key elements are needed to orient the development of necessary actions while considering the organizational context and challenges. In the context of DRDC, the proposed KM vision and principles should orient DRDC implementation efforts to:

– Seek for Science & Technology (S&T) excellence through the development of its people,processes and infra/infostructures;

– Value its knowledge by making it available and easily findable;

– Empower the “need to share” to enable those that “need to know”; and

– Manage the DRDC knowledge to facilitate its exploitation by those that need it.

Based on discussions with DRDC staff and management, KM challenges were identified. A literature review was conducted to identify recent advancements in the KM area as well as the KM approach taken by other organizations. This knowledge was used to develop a KM vision and principles for DRDC, as well as to propose eight (8) KM goals. A roadmap including an action plan for its application has also been developed.

Le bureau du scientifique en chef a été mandaté pour examiner et recommander une stratégie de la gestion de la connaissance (GC) pour Recherche et développement pour la défense Canada (RDDC). Une stratégie de GC peut être développée en une vision et un ensemble de principes supportant la mise en oeuvre de cette vision. Ces deux éléments clés sont nécessaires pour orienter le développement des actions nécessaires tout en considérant le contexte et les défis organisationnels. Dans le contexte de RDDC, la vision et les principes proposés devraient orienter les efforts de mise en oeuvre à :

– Rechercher l’excellence en sciences et technologie à travers le développement des gens, desprocessus et des infrastructures (physiques et informationnelles);

– Valoriser sa connaissance en la rendant disponible et facilement trouvable;

– Habiliter le concept « besoin de partager » afin de mieux supporter ceux qui ont « besoin desavoir »;

– Gérer la connaissance de RDDC afin de faciliter son exploitation par ceux qui en ont besoin.

Suite à des discussions avec le personnel et les gestionnaires de RDDC, les défis reliés à la GC à RDDC ont été identifiés. Une revue de la littérature a permis d’identifier les avancées récentes dans le domaine de la GC ainsi que les approches de GC qui sont utilisées par d’autres organisations. Cette connaissance a été utilisée pour développer et proposer une vision, des principes ainsi que huit objectifs de GC pour RDDC. Une feuille de route incluant un plan d’action pour son application a également été développé.