咨询方法与工具资料库BCWW2【精品文档】
咨询方法与工具资料库KMAT_WK【精品文档】
The KMAT WorkshopsCreating the Internal KMATThe Knowledge Management Assessment Tool TM (KMAT TM) was originally conceived as an external benchmarking diagnostic tool. The benchmark group database consists of both companies and discrete units such a s divisions, departments, or other “culturally bounded” entities. For example, the Business Consulting Practice of Arthur Andersen (AA) as well as the United Kingdom’s AA Office Practice are both valid entries into the benchmark group database.This database of distinct entities permits benchmarking of the twenty-four emerging knowledge practices across a wide range of organizational types. Segmentation of the database is also possible, with groups such as “revenues under $300 million,” “fewer than 2,500 employees” and “manufacturing” among the segment types that can be examined.The Benchmark Results Report that participants receive allows them to see how they compare either to all KMAT participants or to a defined subgroup of organizations (culturally-bounded entities) on the twenty-four emerging knowledge management practices. They can draw a “picture” of the “state of the benchmark group” with respect to knowledge management practices and determine whether they are leading, trailing, or tracking the benchmark group.However, a company would not be able to take action based on the Benchmark Results Report alone. Additional research would need to take place to determine what organizations that give themselves high performance ratings are actually doing to implement the knowledge management practices and then to determine how valid those approaches might be to any specific organization. Some of the qualitative information that has been captured in the benchmark group database will help us to probe further in these areas, but even that will not be sufficient to lead to action.In addition, some organizations may believe they are not ready to join a benchmark group on knowledge management. Or, they may feel that no one person can speak for the group as a whole. Nevertheless, they may consider the issues that surface from reading and answering the KMAT questions to be critical ones that merit internal discussion prior to taking action.Helping Organizations Take ActionTo help companies move closer to taking action, we have adapted the Externa l KMAT for use with small groups that are only interested in one another's responses and views rather than those of the benchmark group as a whole. This involves creating a one-time customized benchmark group using the Internal KMAT (currently only Internal KMAT questionnaires are available; software will be developed during the first half of 1996). Following is a description and methodology for building a workshop around the KMAT results in which knowledge management practices are explored in some depth.Selecting an Appropriate WorkshopThe KMAT workshop can take two forms, depending of the needs, composition, and responses of the client group. In both cases, each participant fills out the KMAT, returns it to Arthur Andersen, and receives a detailed report of how his or her responses compare with those of the other participants.The Knowledge Strategy WorkshopCreating a Common Language and Laying the Groundwork for aKnowledge Value Creation StrategyWho Should ParticipateFor some organizations, the first roadblock to effectively creating and sharing knowledge arises when members find they do not share a framework for thinking about knowledge or even agree on what constitutes organizational knowledge. This can occur even within a work group that shares a common mission. Furthermore, members of the group may be relatively unaware of the strength of their disagreement.The Knowledge Strategy Workshop is appropriate if:∙Participants are from the same work group and are likely to engage in the same knowledge value creation practices, OR;∙Participants are from different work groups, business units, functions, or even organizations (for example, a company and its suppliers), but are responsible for reaching some form of consensus about knowledge value creation priorities, AND;∙Participants are able to think “big picture’ with regard to their entity’s knowledge value creation needs and strategies.The ideal size for this workshop is 12 people.Deliverables∙The KMAT Benchmark Report: This report, generated by KMAT proprietary software, summarizes graphically how the group rates knowledge value creation practices in terms of both Importance and Performance. Each participant receives a customized report showing how his or her responses compare with the rest of the group. The report serves as an important "pre-read" for the workshop and the facilitation team will provide additional analysis and insights throughout the 1-1/2 day session based on the KMAT survey results . ∙List of Knowledge Value Creation Priorities: The group will discuss the knowledge value creation practices they each consider essential to the organization. Using proprietary AA-Interact software the group will examine tradeoffs among the various "essential" practices to come up with a "shortlist" of knowledge value creation priorities. These practices will establish the "boundaries" for the organizational knowledge strategy.∙Knowledge Strategy Objectives: The group will generate a series of scenarios describing what the selected knowledge value creation practices would look like if performed well in their organization. These scenarios will be examined in detail and grouped to create a set of knowledge strategy objectives.∙Building Blocks of a Knowledge Strategy: The group will examine the barriers and resources to achieving knowledge strategy objectives and brainstorm a list of action steps for achieving.. The voting software will be used to explore the feasibility and effectiveness of these tactics as well as the organization’s ability to execute them with existing resources.Knowledge Strategy Workshop : Agenda At-A-Glance。
咨询方法与工具资料库po【精品文档】
BELL SYGMA INC. : SOFTWARE SELECTION 1995Saturday, May 12, 2018PURCHASE ORDER REQUIREMENTSOVERALL REQUIREMENTS (3)Integration (3)Migration (3)V ENDOR T ABLE (4)Q UOTATION E NTRY (4)P URCHASE O RDER E NTRY (5)Validation (5)Processes on Purchase Order Entry (6)Tax Processes (7)Receipts (7)Inventory Features (7)Advanced Purchase Order Features (8)Advanced Foreign Currency Features (9)REPORTING FEATURES (9)Standard Features (9)Vendor Reports (9)Transaction Reports (10)Financial Reports (11)Advanced Reporting Features (12)System Reports (12)CASH FORECASTING (12)POSTING&CLOSING PROCEDURES (13)FIELDS AVAILABLE (13)PURCHASE ORDER REQUIREMENTSReference Information (13)Transaction Dates (14)Descriptive Information (15)Shipping Detailed Information (16)Numeric Information (16)Discount Information (17)Transaction Type Identifier (17)PURCHASE ORDER REQUIREMENTSOVERALL REQUIREMENTSPurchase orders result from/in legal agreements with vendors. There are standard service “products” that Bell Sygma purchases. These require standard descriptions. Support for this in purchase order entry should be described. Tax calculations are a key area for system processing improvements. Taxes should be calculated by the system on a line item basis. EDI is a long term objective.The system needs to include flexibility for the future products inventory that business may create. Details for this have been included under accounts receivable functional requirements.Depending on the architecture of the new system, some of these requirements may be handled differently. Please describe how it would work with your product’s architecture.IntegrationMigration。
咨询方法与工具资料库DOCCONP2【精品文档】
2. Scope
This procedure is mandatory for all employees of Company X.
3. Value Added to Customer
This process adds value to our customers because it controls he documentation of how we create our products. Through controlling these documents we ensure that products are completed in a consistent manner and contributes to the consistent creation of quality products to our customers.
3. Forms which are used as part of the quality system are included in document control. Forms will identify the name of the form, a form number ( Form XYZ.1) and a revision level (i.e. Rev 10/94). The copying of forms is allowed, and the existing stock can be used before the new version of the form is to be used.
咨询方法与工具资料库survrslt【精品文档】
BC Finance Competence Center Financial Shared Services Survey Summary of Results CONFIDENTIAL - FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY September 20, 1995Arthur AndersenBackgroundOn August 7, 1995, a survey developed by the Finance Competence Center was distributed via Lotus Notes to 23 engagement teams involved in financial shared services-related engagements. In some cases, the teams were planning or implementing a shared services structure for the client. In other cases, they were reengineering specific functions in an organization that had recently implemented shared services or was contemplating a shared services structure.The study had three objectives:∙to aid in networking and knowledge sharing among project engagement teams∙to obtain a snapshot of Arthur Andersen's current experience in shared services∙to get a high-level understanding of major issues and approaches related to shared services.During the course of the survey, one team was added to the survey, bringing the total to 24. The majority (19) are located in the Americas region. Three engagements are in the EMEIA region and two are in Asia/Pacific.OverviewFollowing are highlights of the survey results:General∙The survey included companies whose shared services initiatives are in the planning stage, the implementation stage, or completed.∙The engagements are roughly evenly divided between planning and implementation; only 2 companies having completed the implementationstage.∙Almost half of the engagements surveyed are joint ArthurAndersen/Andersen Consulting engagements∙With only one exception, the companies involved have revenues in excess of US$1 billion. The range of revenues is US$200 million to US$9 billion.∙Total finance costs were not available for all companies. Of those reporting, finance costs ranged from US$14 million to US$40 million.∙With only one exception, lower costs was the primary motivation for selecting shared services.Implementation∙Expected savings range from 10% to more than 50%. The largest percentage of savings achieved is 20%.∙ A wide range of difference exists with regard to how implementation should proceed; the most common approach is to consolidate, then reengineer, andfinally standardize.∙The time frame from initial planning to the completion of implementation also varies widely, from 12 to 48 months.∙Benchmarking has either been completed or is planned in every engagement surveyed.Survey ResponsesComplete survey responses are presented in the following pages. A matrix summarizing the responses is provided at the end of this report.Further InformationFor further information on the survey, please contact Tom Bendert in the New York office at 312-708-4884 or Joe Cothrel in Global Best Practices at 312-931-2686.。
咨询方法与工具资料库datawhse【精品文档】
Lite BytesBC’s Topical Technology White PapersData Warehousing -- Concepts,Components, ApproachesD o you know any clients that think reporting is easy? Who canquickly, accurately and concisely determine the state of their businesson a real-time basis? Who doesn’t have mission-critical businessinformation that lives only in a spreadsheet?We haven’t seen many, either. Now a relatively new concept isattempting to make this process easier: Data Warehousing. This Lite Byte will cover the basics of data warehousing -- key concepts, conceptual approaches, opportunity indicators, potential pitfalls, and other issues related to this topic.Executive OverviewData warehousing is designed to allow a business to gather disparate information into a facility that promotes access and integration. Warehouses combine hardware, databases and user access tools into a cohesive system which consolidates, synchronizes andpresents data in a format which eases the transition from datato information.Data Warehouses rely on several advanced concepts. Relational databases which support transaction processing are often not effectively optimized for warehousing, andalternative systems are required. Access tools vary from general purpose to application-specific. Executive Information Systems (EIS) are best viewed as a component, not the end result, of a data warehouse. Finally, data warehouses are a # General Description# Conceptual Architecture # Data Wholesaling &Retailing# Refining# Databases# Access & ReportingWritten by: Ann Willis, BC Dallas Greg Moran, BC Cleveland Randy Green, BC Dallascomplement to, not a replacement for, legacy transaction processing systems.IntroductionThe purpose of this document is to help BC professionals understand the basics of data warehousing. After reading this paper, a BC professional should be at least casually conversant with the terms, approaches, components and issues related to data warehousing. This document will help you identify opportunities for implementation of data warehousing concepts, and will guide your thinking as you move forward with a data warehousing project.However, this Lite Byte is by no means the last word in the technical and process-oriented aspects of data warehousing. This topic is exploding in popularity, and a variety of sources may be found which provided specific technical and re-engineering guidance. This document does not replace the volumes of information available. In the last section of this paper, we will list a bibliography of resources which should be consulted before any decisions are made.If you are familiar with transaction processing systems, some of the information you are about to read may seem contradictory to the concepts you are familiar with. This is to be expected. Data Warehouses do not exist to capture data; they exist to develop information. The difference is subtle but profound, and it permeates the entirety of the data warehousing concept. Be prepared to have your traditional thinking challenged.This is intended to be a living document. The information we discuss here is, almost by definition, limited to a small number of engagements that have actually implemented systems. As you use this document and find sections that need addition, clarification and correction, let the Technology Team know by entering your comments in the appropriate AA Online discussion. By teaming our collective corporate knowledge, we can make this task less complex.G ENERAL D ESCRIPTIONData warehousing is the latest manifestation of a simple data processing requirement: deliver the information users need, when they need it, in a format they can use. Over the history of the industry, this has been the driving force for data processing.Fortunately for those of us in the consulting industry, MIS has historically done a relatively poor job of meeting this simple requirement. For a variety of reasons, systems have been developed which fail one or more of the three key tests.Perhaps most critically, data processing organizations have largely focused on gathering data to answer the question “what happened?”. More and more, managers are moving beyond wanting the know what happened, and are more concerned with understanding why it happened. Data warehousing is an attempt to better answer the “why” question. Data warehousing focuses on summarized data and the relationships of that data to other pieces of data. At the highest level, data warehousing is a movement to turn data into information.engineering of corporations -- responsibility is being pushed lower and lower into corporate organization charts. Where companies could once employ a few people fluent in multivariate regression analysis to serve executive management, now the lowest line manager may have big questions to go along with his new P&L responsibility. This line manager needs tools and information at his fingertips to answer the questions that effect his responsibility center, and he can’t depend on a single Analysis Department to get him those answers six weeks after he needed them.Referring to the old but still applicable pyramid model, we can equate most existing systems with the “data” layer. This is largely why online trans action processing (OLTP) systems exist -- to capture information about an event that occurred. In most OLTP systems, you can make several observations about the data layer:∙it is concerned with discreet events -- OLTP systems have one iron rule: one event, one record.Mixing information from multiple business events into a single transaction is a recipe fordisaster for OLTP processing.∙it is highly detailed -- OLTP systems attempt to capture everything the business would ever need to know about an event. This information about a transaction is often designed to stand alone -- which means it may not be effectively related to other events that have indirect bearing on the event.∙it is optimized for update -- OLTP systems are designed to capture information as long as a user is willing to supply it. The internal workings of OLTP systems revolve around fast responsetimes. Anything that might impede a sub-second screen update is viewed with suspicion. This is all well and good as long as the user is content with answering relatively simple questions. Any good OLTP system can tell you how many widgets were sold in January, or the total payroll cost for a particular sales department. Where OLTP systems fail is in answering questions like, “what was the sales department payroll cost for selling widgets in the Southern Region to wholesale customers this quarter versus this quarter last year?”. Answering these multidimensional questions like the one above requires a different view of the data, and a different sort of database.。
咨询方法与工具资料库FDBCKLOG【精品文档】
Please complete the following information at the end of your Competency Center/Technology session. Competency Center/Technology Team: LogisticsCompetency Center/Technology Leader(s): Pat Dolan, Jim KentWhere are the biggest challenges the integrated competency/technology teams face?Acquiring competent staff quickly and the funding to accomplish thisDeveloping a set of workable performance measurement standards for regional/national practiceWhat integrated competency/technology teams provide the greatest opportunity for BC?Logistics/information technologyHow can we operate as a global team and how can we have a strategy with global influence?Develop worldwide geo-regional competency centers and collaborate among themHow do we encourage or support specialization in smaller practices which may lack the critical mass to do so?A regional practice not permanently attached to specific officesHow do we integrate with other parts of AA - such as ABA, EFC and T&L and how do we leverage that knowledge?We intend to develop relationships with specific audit/industry practicesHow can we better serve AA Worldwide, not just BC?Work with those parts of the org anization that give us the best integrated solution to the client’s needsWhat is missing (e.g. skills, infrastructure) for us to render services to our clients?。
咨询方法与工具资料库CHNGWSHP【精品文档】
Change Management WorkshopI. Introduction about 15 minutesIce Breaker - personal introductions∙Name∙What You Do∙Years at Casual Corner∙Something about you that Nobody Else KnowsOutline of WorkshopPurpose: To help you to understand the forces at play during a time of change. This will help you to make commitments that will allow your team to implement change as quickly and painlessly as possible.Workshop Series: Starts (today) with the Change Management Workshop. About every two weeks, we will continue our workshops. The next scheduled workshop will focus on Communication. A further schedule will be published in the near future.This Workshop: IntroductionThe Maze GameChange Management PrinciplesHomeworkGround Rules - go to flip chartII. Maze Game 40 - 45 minutes Introduction:“This activity requires you to work as one large team to make your way through a maze. There is only one correct path through the maze which the group must discover through trial and error. The goal of this activity is to get the entire group through the maze as efficiently as possible.”In the interest of maximizing the value of this game, I must ask that you not repeat the outcome of the game to other people here at Casual Corner. Does everyone agree with this ?Rules of The Maze:Goal: The Maze represents a project that the team must complete at or under budget. I am your client for the project.Rules:∙Only one person can be in the maze at a time.∙The team must establish a sequence for going through the maze, and maintain it.∙Every member of the team must have attempted the maze before the first person can go through the maze again.∙Moves can be made to any adjacent (horizontal, vertical, or diagonal) square.∙When a per son steps on an “unsafe” square, the client (me) will give you feedback.When this happens, the person stepping on the square must retrace their stepsexactly.∙The correct path through the maze may not be documented or marked in any fashion (no bread crumbs). Team members must rely on memory only.∙No one may talk while the team is working the maze.Budget:∙You have a dollar budget of $10,000, and a time budget of 20 minutes.∙Each minute that your team exceeds the 20 minute budget will cost your team $1,000.∙At any point during the project, your team can (unanimously) call for a time-out, which will last 2 minutes, and cost you $1,000.∙Any first mistake is considered an “learning experience” and is not penalized. Any repetition of a learning experience will cost the team $1,000.∙When retracing steps back out of the maze (after stepping on an unsafe square), any missteps will cost the team $1,000.Playing the Maze:∙The group has 2 minutes to strategize how to approach the project (the maze).∙Begin playing the game. The facilitator must keep close watch on which squares the team members are stepping on. Assess penalties as they occur.∙After the 2nd or 3rd team member has successfully completed the maze, change the correct path. (Go from the 3rd row fm end directly out to 1st row).Debrief the Maze∙How successful were you in achieving your desired results (i.e., under budget) ?∙What problems did you experience ?∙Describe your approach to this activity. What was your plan ?∙How closely did the group stick to its original plan ? Why/ why not ?∙How did the group modify its approach as it progressed ?∙How did the group communicate changes in its approach ? How successfully did you do this ?∙When people in the maze get to the end of the known path (to the “frontier”) they often hesitate before taking a step. Why did people hesitate ?∙How did the group react when someone got beeped going forward ?∙How did people react when someone got beeped exiting ?∙How does your team at work react when someone makes a mistake ?∙How does that reaction impact peoples’ future risk taking ?∙How did you feel when the “safe path” changed during the game ?∙How did it feel to be the person guiding your teammate, when the path changed ?∙How did it feel to be the person(s) trying to find the “new” safe path ?∙What were some of your feelings during this period ?∙How did you react to me, as the client during that period ?∙What feelings or behaviors got in the way of your making progress ?∙Did you notice any diff erence in the way your team negotiated the “early”part of the maze before the change in paths ? How was this different afterthe change in paths ?∙What feelings or behaviors helped your team to reach its goal ?∙How does this relate to work ?III. Managing Change 20 - 25 minutes The Change CurveWhat do we mean by change ? Who has an example of change ?Get examples or either personal or work related changes.What is happening in the retail industry in terms of change ?It seems like it’s happening at an increasing pace.。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
Day 2 December 12
8:00 - 8:15 Spacek Introduction
Review of Day 1’s events with video
highlights of participants’ impressions
and thoughts.
Fredric J. Anderson
8:15 - 9:15 Spacek 21st Century Global Industries
Frank Feather is a renowned business
futurist and strategist. Forecasting a
worldwide “Super-Boom”, he
examines knowledge and technology’s
impact on key industries that he
predicts will drive the global economy
during the next 20 years. He is the
President of Glocal Marketing, Inc. a
Toronto based consulting practice.
Also, he is a regular broadcaster and
author of many influential books
including the best-seller The Future
Consumer.
Frank Feather
9:15 - 9:30 Spacek Transition to Industry Teams
Fred Anderson will discuss the future
of industry and the importance of
convergence, specifically highlighting
BC’s opportunity to go to market by
industry.
Fredric J. Anderson
9:30 - 10:00 Break
10:00 - 2:30 (Includes Lunch) Building Global Industry Teams Overall Aim of the Industry Sessions: ∙To promote global team-building and knowledge sharing.
∙To lay the foundations of global virtual industry teams.
Based on results of the pre-Workshop questionnaire, the following industry sessions will be offered (each participant should attend the most applicable session):
Rooms Global Industry Team Leaders
A69 Energy Victor A. Burk, Thomas L.
Elsenbrook, Timothy P.
Gardner, Len Kujawa, Steven V.
Wilkinson
A02 Financial Markets
Subsequent Financial Markets
sub-sessions: Banking,
Insurance, Asset Management,
Capital Markets Eric Edelstein, Elaine M. Miller, Michael R. Patterson, John T. Riordan, Michael L. Wambay
10:00 - 2:30
(Includes Lunch)
Building Global Industry Teams (continued): Rooms Global Industry Team Leaders
B06/08 Global Communications and
Entertainment Group Chung Yoo Byun, Thomas L. Elliot III
B91/93 Government Services Mark Carawan
B90/92 Healthcare Andreas Burge, Edward J.
Giniat, Darryl J. Hadaway,
Douglas M. Williams
100 Manufacturing
Subsequent Manufacturing
sub-sessions: Automotive,
Electronics, Fabricated Products,
Process, Engineering and
Construction Oldrich Fischmeister, Steven M. Hronec, Kathy L. Iversen, Kirk H. Jabara, N. Ann Moncus, Heribert Pabst,
B02 Retail & Wholesale
Distribution Patrick W. Dolan, Alan L. Gilman, Michael R. Murphy
Note there will not be a Real Estate or Commercial Services Session.
For detailed information refer to the “Building Global Industry Teams”
Tab in this Reference Guide.
2:30 - 3:00 Break。