KNOWLDEGE MANAGEMENT METRICS

Three general-purpose approaches to measuring the impact of KM initiatives include

1. House of Quality (Quality Function Deployment or QFD),
2. Balanced Scorecard, and
3. American Productivity Center (APQC) benchmarking approach
The House of Quality method involves the development of a metrics matrix (house). The
desirable outcomes of KM initiatives are listed on the left wall of the house, the roof consists
of the performance metrics, the right wall consists of the weights (relative importance of the
outcomes), and the base of the house consists of targets, priorities, and benchmark values. By
looking at the correlations within the body of the matrix, management can decide to focus on
those areas of KM that are most likely to affect overall firm performance. A number of
software tools such as QFD designer are available to automate the analysis process.

The Balanced Scorecard technique developed by Kaplan and Norton aims to provide a
technique to balance long-term and short-term objectives, financial and non-financial
measures, leading and lagging indicators, and internal and external perspectives. Typically
four views i.e., customer, financial, internal business, and learning and growth, are used to
translate high-level strategies to real targets. Within each view, the goals, metrics, targets, and
initiatives are listed. Relationships between views must also be considered. The views
(dimensions) can be suitably adapted to assess current state of KM and evaluate the impact of
initiatives in this area. Here also software tools are available through in general the balanced
scorecard is more difficult to develop than QFD. However it is likely to yield more
balanced goals with an in-built consideration of the causal relationships.

The Benchmarking Method the search for industrywide best practices that lead to superior
performance. It usually consists of a study of similar companies to determine how things are
done best in order to adapt these methods for their own use. This technique is best summed
up by the Hindu proverb: know the best to become the best.
Benchmarking is a fairly straightforward KM metric that often represents a good starting
point. There are two general types of benchmarking: internal benchmarking, which involves
comparisons against other units within the same organization or a comparison of a single unit
over different time periods; and external benchmarking, which involves a comparison with
other companies. An individuals evaluation is based on individual growth and team
performance. Those who practice the sharing of knowledge are more likely to be the ones
rising up the organizational ladder. Staff who are not ingrained with the culture probably will
either not know who to share information with, or not share their information because they do
not feel it is of value to anyone. It is establishing that cultureand most important, doing it
for business needsthat is the difference between those who practice knowledge
management and those who just talk about it.

References
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Quality
2. Dalkir, K., & Liebowitz, J. (2011). Knowledge management in theory and practice.
MIT press.
3. http://cloud.snappages.com/b8898dc2c08e137d03449de65b9e82e108c15658/metricsg
uide.pdf

BY
AMAL DEV M
1527505