What aspects of the knowledge management groups and centres of excellence at ArcelorMittal and the unit heads networks and meetings at BP are associated with typical features of open communities of practice?

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

The knowledge management groups at ArcelorMittal and BP have many of the features associated with open communities of practice. These communities are characterised by some form of collaboration around a common set of interests. They differ from project teams and committees in that the participants’ roles are not defined by the firm. Although the focus of these communities is on internal company issues, they may also broker relationships with outside experts. Communities of practice cannot and should not be fully controlled by the firm, building instead on voluntary participation, although support and guidance is essential (Probst and Borzillo, 2008; Wenger and Snyder, 2000).
Mittal refrained from appointing a ‘best plant’ for others to emulate, believing that all units had something to teach others. Some multinationals have appointed geographically dispersed centres of excellence that, among other things, are in charge of knowledge sharing. Such centres can for instance be formed in various locations around a small group of individuals recognised for their leading-edge, strategically valuable knowledge. These centres of excellence are mandated to make their knowledge available throughout the global firm and enhance it so that it remains at the cutting edge. Three types of centre have been identified in global service firms – charismatic (formed around an individual), focused (a small group of experts in a single location), and virtual (a larger group of specialists in multiple locations, linked by a database and proprietary tools). The charismatic and focused centres are well equipped to handle tacit knowledge, while the focused and virtual centres can process more firm-specific knowledge than a single individual (Moore and Birkinshaw, 1998). In contrast to parent-driven knowledge development, these centres tend to rely more on informal networks, often acting as a hub for knowledge sharing activities.
Working in project or so called ‘split egg’ roles (Evans et al., 2009) where managers and professionals have vertical and horizontal responsibilities, is at the heart of BP’s focus on global knowledge management in its oil exploration and production business (Hansen and von Oetinger, 2001). Peer groups of business unit heads meet regularly. They are given joint responsibility for capital allocation and for setting unit performance goals, complemented by a host of cross-unit networks on shared areas of interest. These ‘top of the egg’ knowledge sharing activities take up to 20 per cent of the manager’s time. ‘The model here is an open market of ideas,’ says one business unit head.