KPIs in the different KM phases #metrics


Atanas <atanas_zaprianov@...>
 

Hello everybody,

I am a master-student working on a KM Metrics project. Based on the academic literature I found different metrics for the different KM phases (see down). However, there is no information about which metrics should be KPIs | most important ones pro phase. Because of that I would really appriaciate your opinion on that! Also if you consider other metrics for especially important and they are not featured here, please feel free to add them.

Creation:
1) Number of discussion groups concerning process innovation or products (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
2) Number of valid contributions for the organizational/intrante repositories (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
3) Number of lessons learned (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
4) Participation in communities of practice (demography of KM practice) (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
5) Level of knowledge (background/qualification/seniorty/age) of users in Communities of practice (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
6) Degree of participation in discussion forums (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
7) Ranking of people – position of members according to participation in communities of practice (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
8) Number of artifacts generated (articles or pages) (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)

Access
1) Number of messages or documents stored in the system (Robertson, 2003)
2) Number of registered users in the system (Robertson, 2003)
3) Quality of stored knowledge (Robertson, 2003)
4) Expert evaluation to verify quality (Robertson, 2003)
5) Number of editions or updates (Robertson, 2003)
6) Degree of knowledge updtating (Robertson, 2003)
7) Users` feedback (Robertson, 2003)

Dissemination
1) Number of active communities of practice (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
2) Statistical use of organizational/intranet (frequency, number of access) (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
3) Perception of collaborators in relation to means of available internal communication (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
4) Cost of maintaining (Armistead, 1999)
5) Number of article accesses and downloads. (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
6) Which roles (developers, etc.) most access the site? (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)

Application
1) Number of useful suggestions incorporated in productive processes and/or products (best practices) (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
2) System utilization statistics (Robertson, 2003)
3) Statistics of the utilization of search mechnisms (Robertson, 2003)
4) Number of innovations/new produced products by the company (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
5) Number of ideas or patents (Armistead, 1999)

Results | financial
1) Comparison between planned hours for measurement activities and actual hours (Paulk et. Al, 1999)
2) Number of evaluations made compared with the plan (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
3) KMPI – knowledge management performance index (Chen and Chen, 2005; Lee et al. 2005)

Results | non-financial
1) KMPI – knowledge management performance index (Chen and Chen, 2005; Lee et al. 2005)
2) Improvement of Strategy quality (Chen and Chen, 2005)
3) Improvement of essential business processes (Chen and Chen, 2005)
4) Development of customer relationships (Chen and Chen, 2005)
5) Development of supplier relationships (Chen and Chen, 2005)
6) Development of innovating culuture (Chen and Chen, 2005)
7) Product cycle time reduction (Chen and Chen, 2005)
8) Increase of operational productivity (Chen and Chen, 2005)
9) Average time for problem solution (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
10) Reduction of customer complains on products and services (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
11) Rework reduction (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
12) Individual learning level (Armistead, 1999)
13) Degree of organizational learning (Armistead, 1999)
14) Evidence of best practices (Armistead, 1999)


Thank you very much for your help!

With best regards
Atanas Zaprianov
_____________________________________
Zeppelin University
bridging Economics, Culture and Politics

Atanas Zaprianov
Stud. M.A. | Corporate Management & Economics
Diplom (FH) | Business and Engineering(Print)

Schmidstrasse 72
D-88045 Friedrichshafen | Bodensee

mobil: +49 179 773 55 42
mail: a.zaprianov@zeppelin-university.net
Skype: atanas.zaprianov (Friedrichshafen)
Web: www.zeppelin-university.de


Chris Collison <chris@...>
 

Hi Atanas,
Great question, and a good list - thanks for sharing.
A few to add?

Under Application:
Number of 'lessons learned' successfully applied in other projects.

Under Results, non-financial.
Speed of integration of acquisitions/mergers.
Increase in employee engagement, motivation and retention.

In terms of KPIs, I'm always drawn to application and results-oriented
measures. They always have more influencing power when you need it.

So my top six KPIs from your list would be:

1) Number of active communities of practice (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
3) Perception of collaborators in relation to means of available internal
communication (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
4) Number of innovations/new produced products by the company (Goldoni &
Oliveira, 2009)
8) Increase of operational productivity (Chen and Chen, 2005)
13) Degree of organizational learning (Armistead, 1999)
3) Improvement of essential business processes (Chen and Chen, 2005)


Kind regards,
Chris

www.chriscollison.com

-----Original Message-----
From: sikmleaders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:sikmleaders@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Atanas
Sent: 11 November 2011 13:46
To: sikmleaders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [sikmleaders] KPIs in the different KM phases

Hello everybody,

I am a master-student working on a KM Metrics project. Based on the academic
literature I found different metrics for the different KM phases (see down).
However, there is no information about which metrics should be KPIs | most
important ones pro phase. Because of that I would really appriaciate your
opinion on that! Also if you consider other metrics for especially important
and they are not featured here, please feel free to add them.

Creation:
1) Number of discussion groups concerning process innovation or products
(Teixeira et al., 2004b)
2) Number of valid contributions for the organizational/intrante
repositories (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
3) Number of lessons learned (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
4) Participation in communities of practice (demography of KM practice)
(Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
5) Level of knowledge (background/qualification/seniorty/age) of users in
Communities of practice (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
6) Degree of participation in discussion forums (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
7) Ranking of people - position of members according to participation in
communities of practice (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
8) Number of artifacts generated (articles or pages) (Goldoni & Oliveira,
2009)

Access
1) Number of messages or documents stored in the system (Robertson, 2003)
2) Number of registered users in the system (Robertson, 2003)
3) Quality of stored knowledge (Robertson, 2003)
4) Expert evaluation to verify quality (Robertson, 2003)
5) Number of editions or updates (Robertson, 2003)
6) Degree of knowledge updtating (Robertson, 2003)
7) Users` feedback (Robertson, 2003)

Dissemination
1) Number of active communities of practice (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
2) Statistical use of organizational/intranet (frequency, number of access)
(Teixeira et al., 2004b)
3) Perception of collaborators in relation to means of available internal
communication (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
4) Cost of maintaining (Armistead, 1999)
5) Number of article accesses and downloads. (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
6) Which roles (developers, etc.) most access the site? (Goldoni & Oliveira,
2009)

Application
1) Number of useful suggestions incorporated in productive processes and/or
products (best practices) (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
2) System utilization statistics (Robertson, 2003)
3) Statistics of the utilization of search mechnisms (Robertson, 2003)
4) Number of innovations/new produced products by the company (Goldoni &
Oliveira, 2009)
5) Number of ideas or patents (Armistead, 1999)

Results | financial
1) Comparison between planned hours for measurement activities and actual
hours (Paulk et. Al, 1999)
2) Number of evaluations made compared with the plan (Goldoni & Oliveira,
2009)
3) KMPI - knowledge management performance index (Chen and Chen, 2005; Lee
et al. 2005)

Results | non-financial
1) KMPI - knowledge management performance index (Chen and Chen, 2005; Lee
et al. 2005)
2) Improvement of Strategy quality (Chen and Chen, 2005)
3) Improvement of essential business processes (Chen and Chen, 2005)
4) Development of customer relationships (Chen and Chen, 2005)
5) Development of supplier relationships (Chen and Chen, 2005)
6) Development of innovating culuture (Chen and Chen, 2005)
7) Product cycle time reduction (Chen and Chen, 2005)
8) Increase of operational productivity (Chen and Chen, 2005)
9) Average time for problem solution (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
10) Reduction of customer complains on products and services (Teixeira et
al., 2004b)
11) Rework reduction (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
12) Individual learning level (Armistead, 1999)
13) Degree of organizational learning (Armistead, 1999)
14) Evidence of best practices (Armistead, 1999)


Thank you very much for your help!

With best regards
Atanas Zaprianov
_____________________________________
Zeppelin University
bridging Economics, Culture and Politics

Atanas Zaprianov
Stud. M.A. | Corporate Management & Economics
Diplom (FH) | Business and Engineering(Print)

Schmidstrasse 72
D-88045 Friedrichshafen | Bodensee

mobil: +49 179 773 55 42
mail: a.zaprianov@zeppelin-university.net
Skype: atanas.zaprianov (Friedrichshafen)
Web: www.zeppelin-university.de






------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links


Bhojaraju Gunjal
 

Hi

Some of the following articles/links may serve as pointers and help you to add more information.

How to Use KPIs in Knowledge Management by Patrick Lambe
http://www.greenchameleon.com/uploads/How_to_use_KPIs_in_KM.doc

Key Performance Indicators Metrics
http://www.ejkm.com/issue/download.html?idArticle=288

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for Knowledge Management (KM)
http://www.linkedin.com/answers/management/change-management/MGM_CMG/80743-787232

Key Performance Indicators in Public-Private Partnerships (for Asset Management)
http://international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl10029/pl10029.pdf

KM Cyberary (See "K" section)
http://kmcyberary.web.officelive.com
http://bhojarajug.freeservers.com/cyberary_3.html

Best regards

Bhojaraju Gunjal
Endeavour Research Fellow (Australia),
Bangalore, India.
Profile: http://bhojaraju.info/
********************************************************************************
********************************************************************************

--- In sikmleaders@..., "Atanas" >
> Hello everybody,
>
> I am a master-student working on a KM Metrics project. Based on the academic literature I found different metrics for the different KM phases (see down). However, there is no information about which metrics should be KPIs | most important ones pro phase. Because of that I would really appriaciate your opinion on that! Also if you consider other metrics for especially important and they are not featured here, please feel free to add them.
>
> Creation:
> 1) Number of discussion groups concerning process innovation or products (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
> 2) Number of valid contributions for the organizational/intrante repositories (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
> 3) Number of lessons learned (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
> 4) Participation in communities of practice (demography of KM practice) (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
> 5) Level of knowledge (background/qualification/seniorty/age) of users in Communities of practice (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
> 6) Degree of participation in discussion forums (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
> 7) Ranking of people � position of members according to participation in communities of practice (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
> 8) Number of artifacts generated (articles or pages) (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
>
> Access
> 1) Number of messages or documents stored in the system (Robertson, 2003)
> 2) Number of registered users in the system (Robertson, 2003)
> 3) Quality of stored knowledge (Robertson, 2003)
> 4) Expert evaluation to verify quality (Robertson, 2003)
> 5) Number of editions or updates (Robertson, 2003)
> 6) Degree of knowledge updtating (Robertson, 2003)
> 7) Users` feedback (Robertson, 2003)
>
> Dissemination
> 1) Number of active communities of practice (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
> 2) Statistical use of organizational/intranet (frequency, number of access) (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
> 3) Perception of collaborators in relation to means of available internal communication (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
> 4) Cost of maintaining (Armistead, 1999)
> 5) Number of article accesses and downloads. (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
> 6) Which roles (developers, etc.) most access the site? (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
>
> Application
> 1) Number of useful suggestions incorporated in productive processes and/or products (best practices) (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
> 2) System utilization statistics (Robertson, 2003)
> 3) Statistics of the utilization of search mechnisms (Robertson, 2003)
> 4) Number of innovations/new produced products by the company (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
> 5) Number of ideas or patents (Armistead, 1999)
>
> Results | financial
> 1) Comparison between planned hours for measurement activities and actual hours (Paulk et. Al, 1999)
> 2) Number of evaluations made compared with the plan (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
> 3) KMPI � knowledge management performance index (Chen and Chen, 2005; Lee et al. 2005)
>
> Results | non-financial
> 1) KMPI � knowledge management performance index (Chen and Chen, 2005; Lee et al. 2005)
> 2) Improvement of Strategy quality (Chen and Chen, 2005)
> 3) Improvement of essential business processes (Chen and Chen, 2005)
> 4) Development of customer relationships (Chen and Chen, 2005)
> 5) Development of supplier relationships (Chen and Chen, 2005)
> 6) Development of innovating culuture (Chen and Chen, 2005)
> 7) Product cycle time reduction (Chen and Chen, 2005)
> 8) Increase of operational productivity (Chen and Chen, 2005)
> 9) Average time for problem solution (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
> 10) Reduction of customer complains on products and services (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
> 11) Rework reduction (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
> 12) Individual learning level (Armistead, 1999)
> 13) Degree of organizational learning (Armistead, 1999)
> 14) Evidence of best practices (Armistead, 1999)
>
>
> Thank you very much for your help!
>
> With best regards
> Atanas Zaprianov
> _____________________________________
> Zeppelin University
> bridging Economics, Culture and Politics
>
> Atanas Zaprianov
> Stud. M.A. | Corporate Management & Economics
> Diplom (FH) | Business and Engineering(Print)
>
> Schmidstrasse 72
> D-88045 Friedrichshafen | Bodensee
>
> mobil: +49 179 773 55 42
> mail: a.zaprianov@...
> Skype: atanas.zaprianov (Friedrichshafen)
> Web: www.zeppelin-university.de
>


Atanas <atanas_zaprianov@...>
 

@Chris: Thank you very much for the insights and the additional metrics!
@Bhojaraju: Great links! Especially the paper from Patrick Lambe was really rich on actual metrics. Thank you very much!

--- In sikmleaders@yahoogroups.com, "Bhojaraju Gunjal" <bhojaraju.g@...> wrote:

Hi

Some of the following articles/links may serve as pointers and help you
to add more information.

How to Use KPIs in Knowledge Management by Patrick Lambe
http://www.greenchameleon.com/uploads/How_to_use_KPIs_in_KM.doc

Key Performance Indicators Metrics
http://www.ejkm.com/issue/download.html?idArticle=288

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for Knowledge Management (KM)
http://www.linkedin.com/answers/management/change-management/MGM_CMG/807\;
43-787232

Key Performance Indicators in Public-Private Partnerships (for Asset
Management)
http://international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl10029/pl10029.pdf

KM Cyberary (See "K" section)
http://kmcyberary.web.officelive.com
http://bhojarajug.freeservers.com/cyberary_3.html

Best regards

Bhojaraju Gunjal
Endeavour Research Fellow (Australia),
Bangalore, India.
Profile: http://bhojaraju.info/ <http://bhojaraju.info/>
************************************************************************&#92;
********
KM Cyberary: http://www.bhojarajug.freeservers.com/cyberary.html
<http://www.bhojarajug.freeservers.com/cyberary.html>
KM-Forum: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/KM-Forum <../KM-Forum>
My social sites: http://xeeme.com/BhojarajuGunjal
<http://xeeme.com/BhojarajuGunjal>
Connect Me - [21] LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/bhojarajug> |
[21] Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/bhojarajug> | [21] XeeMe
<http://xeeme.com/BhojarajuGunjal/>
**********************************************************************


Simard, Albert <albert.simard@...>
 

Atanas –

 

The first thing I would do is reduce your list down to 5-7 indicators.  With a bit of thought, that should net you 80% - 90% of all the information that you can possibly glean.  The law of diminishing returns applies to measuring KM as well as to economics.  

 

My personal preference is to downplay transactional measures.  They are the easiest to measure but the least informative.  Efficiency/productivity measures are in the middle.  Effectiveness/outcome measures are the most useful but the most difficult to quantify.

 

Al Simard

 


From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Atanas
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2011 8:46 AM
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: [sikmleaders] KPIs in the different KM phases

 

 

Hello everybody,

I am a master-student working on a KM Metrics project. Based on the academic literature I found different metrics for the different KM phases (see down). However, there is no information about which metrics should be KPIs | most important ones pro phase. Because of that I would really appriaciate your opinion on that! Also if you consider other metrics for especially important and they are not featured here, please feel free to add them.

Creation:
1) Number of discussion groups concerning process innovation or products (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
2) Number of valid contributions for the organizational/intrante repositories (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
3) Number of lessons learned (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
4) Participation in communities of practice (demography of KM practice) (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
5) Level of knowledge (background/qualification/seniorty/age) of users in Communities of practice (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
6) Degree of participation in discussion forums (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
7) Ranking of people – position of members according to participation in communities of practice (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
8) Number of artifacts generated (articles or pages) (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)

Access
1) Number of messages or documents stored in the system (Robertson, 2003)
2) Number of registered users in the system (Robertson, 2003)
3) Quality of stored knowledge (Robertson, 2003)
4) Expert evaluation to verify quality (Robertson, 2003)
5) Number of editions or updates (Robertson, 2003)
6) Degree of knowledge updtating (Robertson, 2003)
7) Users` feedback (Robertson, 2003)

Dissemination
1) Number of active communities of practice (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
2) Statistical use of organizational/intranet (frequency, number of access) (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
3) Perception of collaborators in relation to means of available internal communication (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
4) Cost of maintaining (Armistead, 1999)
5) Number of article accesses and downloads. (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
6) Which roles (developers, etc.) most access the site? (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)

Application
1) Number of useful suggestions incorporated in productive processes and/or products (best practices) (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
2) System utilization statistics (Robertson, 2003)
3) Statistics of the utilization of search mechnisms (Robertson, 2003)
4) Number of innovations/new produced products by the company (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
5) Number of ideas or patents (Armistead, 1999)

Results | financial
1) Comparison between planned hours for measurement activities and actual hours (Paulk et. Al, 1999)
2) Number of evaluations made compared with the plan (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
3) KMPI – knowledge management performance index (Chen and Chen, 2005; Lee et al. 2005)

Results | non-financial
1) KMPI – knowledge management performance index (Chen and Chen, 2005; Lee et al. 2005)
2) Improvement of Strategy quality (Chen and Chen, 2005)
3) Improvement of essential business processes (Chen and Chen, 2005)
4) Development of customer relationships (Chen and Chen, 2005)
5) Development of supplier relationships (Chen and Chen, 2005)
6) Development of innovating culuture (Chen and Chen, 2005)
7) Product cycle time reduction (Chen and Chen, 2005)
8) Increase of operational productivity (Chen and Chen, 2005)
9) Average time for problem solution (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
10) Reduction of customer complains on products and services (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
11) Rework reduction (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
12) Individual learning level (Armistead, 1999)
13) Degree of organizational learning (Armistead, 1999)
14) Evidence of best practices (Armistead, 1999)

Thank you very much for your help!

With best regards
Atanas Zaprianov
_____________________________________
Zeppelin University
bridging Economics, Culture and Politics

Atanas Zaprianov
Stud. M.A. | Corporate Management & Economics
Diplom (FH) | Business and Engineering(Print)

Schmidstrasse 72
D-88045 Friedrichshafen | Bodensee

mobil: +49 179 773 55 42
mail: a.zaprianov@...
Skype: atanas.zaprianov (Friedrichshafen)
Web: www.zeppelin-university.de


Murray Jennex
 

Here is a paper we did at HICSS a couple of years ago, it ties KM KPIs to a KM architecture and to KM Success critical success factors.  Thanks...murray jennex
 

In a message dated 11/14/2011 8:21:54 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, albert.simard@... writes:


Atanas –

 

The first thing I would do is reduce your list down to 5-7 indicators.  With a bit of thought, that should net you 80% - 90% of all the information that you can possibly glean.  The law of diminishing returns applies to measuring KM as well as to economics.  

 

My personal preference is to downplay transactional measures.  They are the easiest to measure but the least informative.  Efficiency/productivity measures are in the middle.  Effectiveness/outcome measures are the most useful but the most difficult to quantify.

 

Al Simard

 


From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Atanas
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2011 8:46 AM
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: [sikmleaders] KPIs in the different KM phases

 

 

Hello everybody,

I am a master-student working on a KM Metrics project. Based on the academic literature I found different metrics for the different KM phases (see down). However, there is no information about which metrics should be KPIs | most important ones pro phase. Because of that I would really appriaciate your opinion on that! Also if you consider other metrics for especially important and they are not featured here, please feel free to add them.

Creation:
1) Number of discussion groups concerning process innovation or products (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
2) Number of valid contributions for the organizational/intrante repositories (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
3) Number of lessons learned (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
4) Participation in communities of practice (demography of KM practice) (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
5) Level of knowledge (background/qualification/seniorty/age) of users in Communities of practice (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
6) Degree of participation in discussion forums (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
7) Ranking of people – position of members according to participation in communities of practice (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
8) Number of artifacts generated (articles or pages) (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)

Access
1) Number of messages or documents stored in the system (Robertson, 2003)
2) Number of registered users in the system (Robertson, 2003)
3) Quality of stored knowledge (Robertson, 2003)
4) Expert evaluation to verify quality (Robertson, 2003)
5) Number of editions or updates (Robertson, 2003)
6) Degree of knowledge updtating (Robertson, 2003)
7) Users` feedback (Robertson, 2003)

Dissemination
1) Number of active communities of practice (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
2) Statistical use of organizational/intranet (frequency, number of access) (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
3) Perception of collaborators in relation to means of available internal communication (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
4) Cost of maintaining (Armistead, 1999)
5) Number of article accesses and downloads. (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
6) Which roles (developers, etc.) most access the site? (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)

Application
1) Number of useful suggestions incorporated in productive processes and/or products (best practices) (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
2) System utilization statistics (Robertson, 2003)
3) Statistics of the utilization of search mechnisms (Robertson, 2003)
4) Number of innovations/new produced products by the company (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
5) Number of ideas or patents (Armistead, 1999)

Results | financial
1) Comparison between planned hours for measurement activities and actual hours (Paulk et. Al, 1999)
2) Number of evaluations made compared with the plan (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
3) KMPI – knowledge management performance index (Chen and Chen, 2005; Lee et al. 2005)

Results | non-financial
1) KMPI – knowledge management performance index (Chen and Chen, 2005; Lee et al. 2005)
2) Improvement of Strategy quality (Chen and Chen, 2005)
3) Improvement of essential business processes (Chen and Chen, 2005)
4) Development of customer relationships (Chen and Chen, 2005)
5) Development of supplier relationships (Chen and Chen, 2005)
6) Development of innovating culuture (Chen and Chen, 2005)
7) Product cycle time reduction (Chen and Chen, 2005)
8) Increase of operational productivity (Chen and Chen, 2005)
9) Average time for problem solution (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
10) Reduction of customer complains on products and services (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
11) Rework reduction (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
12) Individual learning level (Armistead, 1999)
13) Degree of organizational learning (Armistead, 1999)
14) Evidence of best practices (Armistead, 1999)

Thank you very much for your help!

With best regards
Atanas Zaprianov
_____________________________________
Zeppelin University
bridging Economics, Culture and Politics

Atanas Zaprianov
Stud. M.A. | Corporate Management & Economics
Diplom (FH) | Business and Engineering(Print)

Schmidstrasse 72
D-88045 Friedrichshafen | Bodensee

mobil: +49 179 773 55 42
mail: a.zaprianov@...
Skype: atanas.zaprianov (Friedrichshafen)
Web: www.zeppelin-university.de


Atanas <atanas_zaprianov@...>
 

Thank you very much! Really interesting and practical approach! And it sums up nicely, what we gathered from our experts interviews.

Best regards
Atanas

--- In sikmleaders@yahoogroups.com, murphjen@... wrote:

Here is a paper we did at HICSS a couple of years ago, it ties KM KPIs to a
KM architecture and to KM Success critical success factors.
Thanks...murray jennex


In a message dated 11/14/2011 8:21:54 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
albert.simard@... writes:




Atanas â€"
The first thing I would do is reduce your list down to 5-7 indicators.
With a bit of thought, that should net you 80% - 90% of all the information
that you can possibly glean. The law of diminishing returns applies to
measuring KM as well as to economics.
My personal preference is to downplay transactional measures. They are
the easiest to measure but the least informative. Efficiency/productivity
measures are in the middle. Effectiveness/outcome measures are the most
useful but the most difficult to quantify.
Al Simard


____________________________________

From: sikmleaders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:sikmleaders@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Atanas
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2011 8:46 AM
To: sikmleaders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [sikmleaders] KPIs in the different KM phases



Hello everybody,

I am a master-student working on a KM Metrics project. Based on the
academic literature I found different metrics for the different KM phases (see
down). However, there is no information about which metrics should be KPIs |
most important ones pro phase. Because of that I would really appriaciate
your opinion on that! Also if you consider other metrics for especially
important and they are not featured here, please feel free to add them.

Creation:
1) Number of discussion groups concerning process innovation or products
(Teixeira et al., 2004b)
2) Number of valid contributions for the organizational/intrante
repositories (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
3) Number of lessons learned (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
4) Participation in communities of practice (demography of KM practice)
(Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
5) Level of knowledge (background/qualification/seniorty/age) of users in
Communities of practice (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
6) Degree of participation in discussion forums (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
7) Ranking of people â€" position of members according to participation in
communities of practice (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
8) Number of artifacts generated (articles or pages) (Goldoni & Oliveira,
2009)

Access
1) Number of messages or documents stored in the system (Robertson, 2003)
2) Number of registered users in the system (Robertson, 2003)
3) Quality of stored knowledge (Robertson, 2003)
4) Expert evaluation to verify quality (Robertson, 2003)
5) Number of editions or updates (Robertson, 2003)
6) Degree of knowledge updtating (Robertson, 2003)
7) Users` feedback (Robertson, 2003)

Dissemination
1) Number of active communities of practice (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
2) Statistical use of organizational/intranet (frequency, number of
access) (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
3) Perception of collaborators in relation to means of available internal
communication (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
4) Cost of maintaining (Armistead, 1999)
5) Number of article accesses and downloads. (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
6) Which roles (developers, etc.) most access the site? (Goldoni &
Oliveira, 2009)

Application
1) Number of useful suggestions incorporated in productive processes
and/or products (best practices) (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
2) System utilization statistics (Robertson, 2003)
3) Statistics of the utilization of search mechnisms (Robertson, 2003)
4) Number of innovations/new produced products by the company (Goldoni &
Oliveira, 2009)
5) Number of ideas or patents (Armistead, 1999)

Results | financial
1) Comparison between planned hours for measurement activities and actual
hours (Paulk et. Al, 1999)
2) Number of evaluations made compared with the plan (Goldoni & Oliveira,
2009)
3) KMPI â€" knowledge management performance index (Chen and Chen, 2005; Lee
et al. 2005)

Results | non-financial
1) KMPI â€" knowledge management performance index (Chen and Chen, 2005; Lee
et al. 2005)
2) Improvement of Strategy quality (Chen and Chen, 2005)
3) Improvement of essential business processes (Chen and Chen, 2005)
4) Development of customer relationships (Chen and Chen, 2005)
5) Development of supplier relationships (Chen and Chen, 2005)
6) Development of innovating culuture (Chen and Chen, 2005)
7) Product cycle time reduction (Chen and Chen, 2005)
8) Increase of operational productivity (Chen and Chen, 2005)
9) Average time for problem solution (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
10) Reduction of customer complains on products and services (Teixeira et
al., 2004b)
11) Rework reduction (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
12) Individual learning level (Armistead, 1999)
13) Degree of organizational learning (Armistead, 1999)
14) Evidence of best practices (Armistead, 1999)

Thank you very much for your help!

With best regards
Atanas Zaprianov
_____________________________________
Zeppelin University
bridging Economics, Culture and Politics

Atanas Zaprianov
Stud. M.A. | Corporate Management & Economics
Diplom (FH) | Business and Engineering(Print)

Schmidstrasse 72
D-88045 Friedrichshafen | Bodensee

mobil: +49 179 773 55 42
mail: _a.zaprianov@..._
(mailto:a.zaprianov@...)
Skype: atanas.zaprianov (Friedrichshafen)
Web: www.zeppelin-university.de


 

Hi Murray

 

Who uses this in practice?

 

Thanks

 

Bill

 

Bill Kaplan CPCM | Great Falls, Virginia 22066 | 571.934.7408 | 703.401.4198 (direct) | ckobill |

 

 

Learn more about the solutions and value we provide at www.workingknowledge-csp.com

 Click to call me

 

From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of murphjen@...
Sent: Saturday, November 26, 2011 11:33 PM
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] KPIs in the different KM phases

 

 

Here is a paper we did at HICSS a couple of years ago, it ties KM KPIs to a KM architecture and to KM Success critical success factors.  Thanks...murray jennex

 

In a message dated 11/14/2011 8:21:54 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, albert.simard@... writes:




Atanas –

 

The first thing I would do is reduce your list down to 5-7 indicators.  With a bit of thought, that should net you 80% - 90% of all the information that you can possibly glean.  The law of diminishing returns applies to measuring KM as well as to economics.  

 

My personal preference is to downplay transactional measures.  They are the easiest to measure but the least informative.  Efficiency/productivity measures are in the middle.  Effectiveness/outcome measures are the most useful but the most difficult to quantify.

 

Al Simard

 


From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Atanas
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2011 8:46 AM
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: [sikmleaders] KPIs in the different KM phases

 

 

Hello everybody,

I am a master-student working on a KM Metrics project. Based on the academic literature I found different metrics for the different KM phases (see down). However, there is no information about which metrics should be KPIs | most important ones pro phase. Because of that I would really appriaciate your opinion on that! Also if you consider other metrics for especially important and they are not featured here, please feel free to add them.

Creation:
1) Number of discussion groups concerning process innovation or products (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
2) Number of valid contributions for the organizational/intrante repositories (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
3) Number of lessons learned (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
4) Participation in communities of practice (demography of KM practice) (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
5) Level of knowledge (background/qualification/seniorty/age) of users in Communities of practice (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
6) Degree of participation in discussion forums (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
7) Ranking of people – position of members according to participation in communities of practice (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
8) Number of artifacts generated (articles or pages) (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)

Access
1) Number of messages or documents stored in the system (Robertson, 2003)
2) Number of registered users in the system (Robertson, 2003)
3) Quality of stored knowledge (Robertson, 2003)
4) Expert evaluation to verify quality (Robertson, 2003)
5) Number of editions or updates (Robertson, 2003)
6) Degree of knowledge updtating (Robertson, 2003)
7) Users` feedback (Robertson, 2003)

Dissemination
1) Number of active communities of practice (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
2) Statistical use of organizational/intranet (frequency, number of access) (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
3) Perception of collaborators in relation to means of available internal communication (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
4) Cost of maintaining (Armistead, 1999)
5) Number of article accesses and downloads. (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
6) Which roles (developers, etc.) most access the site? (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)

Application
1) Number of useful suggestions incorporated in productive processes and/or products (best practices) (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
2) System utilization statistics (Robertson, 2003)
3) Statistics of the utilization of search mechnisms (Robertson, 2003)
4) Number of innovations/new produced products by the company (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
5) Number of ideas or patents (Armistead, 1999)

Results | financial
1) Comparison between planned hours for measurement activities and actual hours (Paulk et. Al, 1999)
2) Number of evaluations made compared with the plan (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
3) KMPI – knowledge management performance index (Chen and Chen, 2005; Lee et al. 2005)

Results | non-financial
1) KMPI – knowledge management performance index (Chen and Chen, 2005; Lee et al. 2005)
2) Improvement of Strategy quality (Chen and Chen, 2005)
3) Improvement of essential business processes (Chen and Chen, 2005)
4) Development of customer relationships (Chen and Chen, 2005)
5) Development of supplier relationships (Chen and Chen, 2005)
6) Development of innovating culuture (Chen and Chen, 2005)
7) Product cycle time reduction (Chen and Chen, 2005)
8) Increase of operational productivity (Chen and Chen, 2005)
9) Average time for problem solution (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
10) Reduction of customer complains on products and services (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
11) Rework reduction (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
12) Individual learning level (Armistead, 1999)
13) Degree of organizational learning (Armistead, 1999)
14) Evidence of best practices (Armistead, 1999)

Thank you very much for your help!

With best regards
Atanas Zaprianov
_____________________________________
Zeppelin University
bridging Economics, Culture and Politics

Atanas Zaprianov
Stud. M.A. | Corporate Management & Economics
Diplom (FH) | Business and Engineering(Print)

Schmidstrasse 72
D-88045 Friedrichshafen | Bodensee

mobil: +49 179 773 55 42
mail: a.zaprianov@...
Skype: atanas.zaprianov (Friedrichshafen)
Web: www.zeppelin-university.de


Murray Jennex
 

the research is based off of German firms so it is used (although to what degree I don't know) in Germany...murray
 

In a message dated 11/27/2011 7:06:56 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, bill@... writes:


Hi Murray

 

Who uses this in practice?

 

Thanks

 

Bill

 

Bill Kaplan CPCM | Great Falls, Virginia 22066 | 571.934.7408 | 703.401.4198 (direct) | ckobill |

 

 

Learn more about the solutions and value we provide at www.workingknowledge-csp.com

 Click to call me

 

From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of murphjen@...
Sent: Saturday, November 26, 2011 11:33 PM
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: Re: [sikmleaders] KPIs in the different KM phases

 

 

Here is a paper we did at HICSS a couple of years ago, it ties KM KPIs to a KM architecture and to KM Success critical success factors.  Thanks...murray jennex

 

In a message dated 11/14/2011 8:21:54 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, albert.simard@... writes:




Atanas –

 

The first thing I would do is reduce your list down to 5-7 indicators.  With a bit of thought, that should net you 80% - 90% of all the information that you can possibly glean.  The law of diminishing returns applies to measuring KM as well as to economics.  

 

My personal preference is to downplay transactional measures.  They are the easiest to measure but the least informative.  Efficiency/productivity measures are in the middle.  Effectiveness/outcome measures are the most useful but the most difficult to quantify.

 

Al Simard

 


From: sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Atanas
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2011 8:46 AM
To: sikmleaders@...
Subject: [sikmleaders] KPIs in the different KM phases

 

 

Hello everybody,

I am a master-student working on a KM Metrics project. Based on the academic literature I found different metrics for the different KM phases (see down). However, there is no information about which metrics should be KPIs | most important ones pro phase. Because of that I would really appriaciate your opinion on that! Also if you consider other metrics for especially important and they are not featured here, please feel free to add them.

Creation:
1) Number of discussion groups concerning process innovation or products (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
2) Number of valid contributions for the organizational/intrante repositories (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
3) Number of lessons learned (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
4) Participation in communities of practice (demography of KM practice) (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
5) Level of knowledge (background/qualification/seniorty/age) of users in Communities of practice (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
6) Degree of participation in discussion forums (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
7) Ranking of people – position of members according to participation in communities of practice (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
8) Number of artifacts generated (articles or pages) (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)

Access
1) Number of messages or documents stored in the system (Robertson, 2003)
2) Number of registered users in the system (Robertson, 2003)
3) Quality of stored knowledge (Robertson, 2003)
4) Expert evaluation to verify quality (Robertson, 2003)
5) Number of editions or updates (Robertson, 2003)
6) Degree of knowledge updtating (Robertson, 2003)
7) Users` feedback (Robertson, 2003)

Dissemination
1) Number of active communities of practice (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
2) Statistical use of organizational/intranet (frequency, number of access) (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
3) Perception of collaborators in relation to means of available internal communication (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
4) Cost of maintaining (Armistead, 1999)
5) Number of article accesses and downloads. (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
6) Which roles (developers, etc.) most access the site? (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)

Application
1) Number of useful suggestions incorporated in productive processes and/or products (best practices) (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
2) System utilization statistics (Robertson, 2003)
3) Statistics of the utilization of search mechnisms (Robertson, 2003)
4) Number of innovations/new produced products by the company (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
5) Number of ideas or patents (Armistead, 1999)

Results | financial
1) Comparison between planned hours for measurement activities and actual hours (Paulk et. Al, 1999)
2) Number of evaluations made compared with the plan (Goldoni & Oliveira, 2009)
3) KMPI – knowledge management performance index (Chen and Chen, 2005; Lee et al. 2005)

Results | non-financial
1) KMPI – knowledge management performance index (Chen and Chen, 2005; Lee et al. 2005)
2) Improvement of Strategy quality (Chen and Chen, 2005)
3) Improvement of essential business processes (Chen and Chen, 2005)
4) Development of customer relationships (Chen and Chen, 2005)
5) Development of supplier relationships (Chen and Chen, 2005)
6) Development of innovating culuture (Chen and Chen, 2005)
7) Product cycle time reduction (Chen and Chen, 2005)
8) Increase of operational productivity (Chen and Chen, 2005)
9) Average time for problem solution (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
10) Reduction of customer complains on products and services (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
11) Rework reduction (Teixeira et al., 2004b)
12) Individual learning level (Armistead, 1999)
13) Degree of organizational learning (Armistead, 1999)
14) Evidence of best practices (Armistead, 1999)

Thank you very much for your help!

With best regards
Atanas Zaprianov
_____________________________________
Zeppelin University
bridging Economics, Culture and Politics

Atanas Zaprianov
Stud. M.A. | Corporate Management & Economics
Diplom (FH) | Business and Engineering(Print)

Schmidstrasse 72
D-88045 Friedrichshafen | Bodensee

mobil: +49 179 773 55 42
mail: a.zaprianov@...
Skype: atanas.zaprianov (Friedrichshafen)
Web: www.zeppelin-university.de