最近在翻译一个个案教学文章, 翻完看了很多次还是觉得怪怪的(很多英文用法看不太懂也找不到). 所以来版上请大家协助, 若这边不能发这类文请跟我说, 我自己删掉. 我的翻译: 迈向以知识为基础的组织 管理者若想将公司转成以知识为基础之组织，应聚焦於以下活动： 将知识定义为组织之任务及目的。例如世界银行组织（the World Bank Group）将自己定 位为知识银行，而且不只是口号而已，世界银行致力於了解、管理各想知识，以学习如何 减少世界的贫穷。世界银行明白光提供发展基金并不是一个有效解决贫穷问题的方法，而 改成助长知识之产生及分享，现在借款只是银行任务的一部份。类似状况亦发生在 Lincoln Corp.，该公司几年前被Swiss Reinsurance Co. 并购时，亦将自己定位为提供 知识为基础的风险管理，而不仅是再保险的销售者；该公司之策略、组织技术架构及核心 执行力都聚焦於建立及维持策略性知识平台，并据以提供产品及服务。因此，就如同 Lincoln Corp.一般，一家公司必需要定义知识在组织内扮演的角色，组织才有可能成为 以知识为基础的组织。 以产品与服务为基础的传统SIC编码已经无法再呈现公司如何适应产业的真实现象. 重点 是竞争者们今日共同拥有的同样知识, 而不是产品. 举例来说, 食物制程与药物公司拥有 不同的SIC编码, 但是拥有同种类的专利、受雇者技能与其他知识基础制度. 懂得产业基 础名词的药物官员会注意食品加工公司的低胆固醇食品风行. 摄影产业中的官员体认到消 费性电子公司知道如何去制造下一代数位摄影机, 比他知道的更多. 在脑中利用知识设计策略. 一个以知识为基础的组织基於他所了解与他做什麽来定 义策略. 找出比竞争者懂的更多的策略性杠杆作用点(strategic leverage points)能提 供竞争优势. 他也认识到把知识强加在公司能顺利执行的事物上是有极限的. 第一资本 财务公司(Capital One Financial Corp.)的核心知识, 举例来说, 是在小众行销(micromarketing)与目标风险分析 (targeted risk analysis), 并不是卖信用卡. 他以优秀的统计建模知识与由经验学来的 构思来建立他的个人财务风险管理策略. 然而, 他明确的承认, 也无法对在统计上做分析 来支持快速循环实验法(rapid-cycle experimentation.)的专利性资料库新发展阶段不敏 感的市场(例如那些涉及借贷与保险)上竞争表现的这麽好. 实做直接支援公司的策略知识需求的知识管理流程与架构. 知识管理近来被批评, 但是很大一部份能被归因於大部分知识管理倡议没有聚焦在策略知识的因素. 一个组织用 知识术语(terms of knowledge)在定义他的策略与确认策略性知识杠杆作用点 (strategic knowledge leverage points)会了解他的知识管理成果聚焦在哪边, 能从他 的投资得到长期回报, 与能胜过竞争对手的知识管理成果. 将公司转变为策略的学习型组织. 一个组织维持知识优势的能力是以他的学习能力 为基础. 成功的公司寻找机会来实验与从他们策略性考量的知识领域中学习. 举例来说, Lincoln Re寻找困难的再保案件来制造学习机会. Holcim也做同样的事, 搜寻新奇的建筑 机会(novel construction opportunities). 影响客户、贸易夥伴、供应商、消费者、利 益团体也同样重要----简单来说, 任何人能帮助企业建立他需要的知识. 最後, 学习是将 公司的策略视为假设与做测试来从中培养. 举例来说, Capital One像实验般衡量、测试 、改进来审视每个市场、每样产品与每个流程. 区隔公司的客户与市场依据能从中学习多少, 而不是基於产品与服务. 像Capital One 与Lincoln Re这样的公司依赖去开发他们知道能提供更多学习机会的熟识客户, 也主动搜 寻他们只知道一点点的市场区隔. 新的客户区隔是最重要的学习来源与未来的策略性机会 . 把学习成本当成投资, 而不是费用. 管理者应该对学习上的投资评价是未来的行动 机会, 而不是依据传统ROI与DCF分析当成沉没成本. 让企业亏本的客户是好的投资, 假如 他提供特定的对未来市场机会的学习或是保持企业有足够机会学得更多. 举例来说, Lincoln Re惯常的使用选择权定价模式(options-pricing models)来估价他在知识与学习 上的投资. 以知识为基础的组织明白学习的经济与策略价值. 重新思考经营模式. 公司从销售主要实体产品或服务给以知识为基础的对象来做转 变会看到经营模式彻底改变的经济上可行性. IBM公司从销售他的知识来赚钱, 会对竞争 者的产品做出建议, 假如这符合客户的最大利益. 这家公司知道他的知识对客户来说比硬 体更有价值(也让IBM赚更多的钱). Buckman Labs 发现他卖给客户更少的化学药品对客户 更有利也是类似的情形. 公司依照这个规则来转变必须发展以知识为基础的定价以及传递 典范与支援给对的人、报酬与文化. 认真看待人力资源管理. 以知识为基础的组织招募员工与以知识为基础来培养他们 的职涯需要去竞争与执行策略. 他建立与依靠社会资本来成为知识建立、交换与应用的关 键动因. 当他们学到一课时, 奖励创造力、风险承受、实验方法、想像力甚至是失误. 补强组织的使命透过协调内部与外部沟通. 成为以知识为基础的组织很重要的部份 是察觉这个. 所以Buckman Labs在他的员工身上也就是以知识为基础的观点的组成要素, 投资重要资源在沟通. Lincoln Re透过配合年报、贸易文章、学术期刊、主管的演讲以及 其他活动来主动地培养与管理外部形象为以知识为基础的组织. 步骤的概要. 当然并不容易完成. 尝试去实做这些步骤的管理者需要专注在想像力与努 力来让他们的组织真的以知识为基础. 但对他们来说贩售以知识为基础的产品与服务来达 成这个成果是特别重要的. 像TRG所做的, 在机会中降落与迷失很危险. 换句话说, 任何 公司, 即使是做水泥的, 成为以知识为基础的组织都能找到重要与可维持的竞争优势. 原文: Steps Toward a Knowledge-Based Organization Rethinking process, place, purpose and perspective is a daunting but achievable goal. Managers who want to turn their companies into knowledge-based organizations need to focus on several key actions: Define the organization's mission and purpose in terms of knowledge. For example, the World Bank Group now refers to itself as "the knowledge bank." This is not merely window dressing. The World Bank has gone to great lengths to understand and manage the role of knowledge and learning in reducing world poverty. It realized that just supplying development funds was not an effective solution and has invested and reorganized to foster knowledge creation and sharing. The money it lends is just one part of how it carries out its mission. Similarly, Lincoln National Corp. (Lincoln Re), at the time of its acquisition by the Swiss Reinsurance Co. (Swiss Re) a couple of years ago, thought of itself as a provider of knowledge-based risk management rather than a seller of reinsurance. Its strategy, organization, technology infrastructure and core processes were all focused on creating and maintaining the strategic "knowledge platform" from which it derived its products and services. Like Lincoln Re, a company that wants to change must be able to define the strategic role knowledge plays in the organization. Define the organization's industry and position within it in terms of knowledge. Traditional SIC codes based on products and services no longer give a true picture of how companies fit into industries. The most important thing that competitors have in common today is similar knowledge, not products. For example, food processing and pharmaceutical companies have different SIC codes but have similar kinds of patents, employee skills and other knowledge-based metrics. A pharmaceutical executive who understands her industry in knowledge-based terms would have an eye on food-processing companies making cholesterollowering food spreads. An executive in the photographic-imaging industry would realize that consumer-electronics companies might know more than his own company about how to make the next generation of digital cameras. Formulate strategy with knowledge in mind. A knowledgebased organization defines its strategy based on what it knows as well as what it makes. It finds strategic leverage points where knowing more than competitors provides a competitive advantage. It also recognizes that knowledge imposes limits on what the company can successfully execute. Capital One Financial Corp.'s core expertise, for example, is in micromarketing and targeted risk analysis, not in selling credit cards. It built its strategy of individual financial risk management on the basis of its superior knowledge of statistical modeling and experimental design. It explicitly recognized, however, that it could not compete as well in markets (those involving lending or insurance, for example) that were not susceptible to the development of proprietary databases that could be statistically analyzed to support rapid-cycle experimentation. Implement knowledge-management processes and structures that directly support the company's strategic knowledge requirements. Knowledge management has gotten a bad rap lately, but much of it can be attributed to the fact that most KM initiatives are not focused on strategic knowledge. An organization that defines its strategy in terms of knowledge and identifies the strategic knowledge leverage points will know where to focus its KM efforts, will get a long-term return on its investment, and will best the KM efforts of competitors. Transform the company into a strategic learning organization. An organization's ability to sustain a knowledge advantage is based on its ability to learn. Successful companies look for opportunities to experiment and learn in knowledge domains they consider strategic. Lincoln Re, for example, searched for difficult reinsurance cases to create learning opportunities. Holcim did the same, seeking out novel construction opportunities. It's also important to involve customers, trading partners, suppliers, consumers, interest groups - in short, anyone who can help the business to create the knowledge it needs. Finally, learning is fostered by treating the company's strategy as a hypothesis and then testing it. Capital One, for example, views every market, every product and every process as an experiment to be measured, tested and improved. Segment the company's customers and markets not only on the basis of products and services but also according to how much can be learned from them. While companies like Capital One and Lincoln Re look to exploit what they know with familiar customers who offer incremental learning opportunities, they also actively seek market segments that they know little about. New customer segments are the most important source of learning and future strategic opportunities. Treat the cost of learning as an investment, not an expense. Managers should evaluate investments in learning as options for future action rather than sunk costs according to traditional ROI or DCF analysis. A customer taken at a loss is a good investment if it provides significant learning for future market opportunities or keeps the company in the game long enough to learn more about an opportunity. Lincoln Re, for example, routinely used options-pricing models to value its investments in knowledge and learning. Knowledge-based organizations understand the economic as well as the strategic value of learning. Rethink the business model. A company making the transition from selling primarily physical products or services to knowledge- based ones will see the economics of the business radically change. IBM Corp., which makes most of its money today selling its knowledge, will recommend competitors' products if that is in the best interest of its clients: The company knows that its knowledge has even more value for clients (and leads to more profit for IBM) than its hardware. Similarly, Buckman Labs found that it provided more value to its customers by selling less of its chemicals. Companies that make a change on this order must develop knowledge-based pricing and delivery models and support them with the right people, rewards and culture. Take human resource management seriously. The knowledgebased organization recruits employees and develops their careers on the basis of the knowledge it needs to compete and execute its strategy. It builds and relies on social capital as a key motivator for knowledge creation, exchange and application. And it rewards creativity, risk taking, experimentation, imagination and even failure when they generate important lessons learned. Reinforce the organization's mission via coordinated internal and external communication. A large part of being a knowledgebased organization is being perceived as one. Thus Buckman Labs invested significant resources in communicating to its employees the substance of its new knowledge-based perspective. Lincoln Re actively cultivated and managed its external image as a knowledgebased organization via pieces in its annual report, articles in trade and scholarly journals, speeches by executives and other activities. THE STEPS OUTLINED here are not easy to accomplish, of course. Managers who try to implement them will need to employ both imagination and effort to make their organizations truly knowledge- based. But it's especially important for those running businesses that sell knowledge-based products or services to make this effort; there is great danger in coasting along and missing out on opportunities, as TRG has done. On the other hand, any company - even one that makes cement - can find a significant and sustainable competitive advantage in becoming a real knowledgebased organization. -- 哪里～都那麽熟了～ ╮ 口桀口桀... ╭ 谢谢你们来参加我们的婚礼～ ◢███◣ ◢███◣ ◢███◣ ◢███◣ ◢███◣ ▄▄▄▄▄▆████◤ ███◥◥ ██◤◥██(◥◥◥◥█● █████ █████ ███ + ▆█▆█◥ ●▄●▄██ ◥████◤◥███◤◤ ██◤ ◤ ◥︺███◤◥－███◤ ◢ 同梯 ◣ ◢ 室友◣ ◢ 哥哥 ◣ ◢▼██◣ ◢▏█▉◣ --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 140.117.72.236