Association (BSRIA).

Knowledge Mapping and Bringing About Change for the Sustainable Urban Environment –Transition Project: EP/C009649/1REVIEW REPORTResearch Background/ContextThis report describes the findings of a 6-month Transition Project entitled “Knowledge Mapping and Bringing About Change for the Sustainable Urban Environment”, involving Glasgow Caledonian University, Open University, University of Manchester, London South Bank University and Cambridge University as academic partners. The non-academic partners included Sustainability Centre in Glasgow (SCG), Laing O’ Rourke Scotland, Dearle and Henderson, Centre for the Built Environment (CBE, Glasgow), Caledonian Shanks (now Caledonian Environment Centre) and the Building Services Research and Information Association (BSRIA).The aims of the 6 months Transition Project are primarily two folds: (1) It offers the opportunity of retaining the Research Assistants/Fellows involved in the EPSRC funded Scoping Study, building a strong consortium of researchers and practitioners to put a main bid together and at the same time be able to identify appropriate case studies to be used for the main bid if successful.(2) To develop and fine tune a conceptual framework on “Knowledge Processes and Mapping” to be used in the main bid if successful.Many industries are facing pressure to increase the sustainability of their practice (Parkin, 2000). This pressure, in many cases, imply significant change of an industry’s understanding of the demands of society and of its clients, as well as its own corporate social responsibility, and can imply major changes in its work practices. The awareness of the impact of sustainable development is growing around the globe. It is also firmly on the political agenda of most countries in both developed and developing countries. The Brundtland Report (Brundtland, 1987), the UN summit in Rio de Janiro (1992), the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg 2002 and the UK National Sustainable Development Strategy (HM Government: 1999) are just a few initiatives which have provided additional impetus for this. In order to be successful, sustainable development must promote economic, social and environmental needs and benefits; focusing on inevitable trade-offs as well as synergies between these needs and benefits. Sustainability therefore means thinking in terms of whole systems, with all their interconnectedness, consequences, feed-forward and feedback loops. Sustainability issues inherently cut across many boundaries; and are transdisciplinary and trans-organisational. This brings to the fore issues of how individuals, groups and organisations make knowledgeable interpretations for sustainability within organisations and professional structures and, in industries based on multi-firm and multi-professional projects, across these boundaries. The above discourse would suggest that the vagaries of different industrial sectors are likely to impact on how knowledge for sustainability is created, transferred and applied. Knowledge in the field of sustainability is also subject to ideological pressures that can be at odds with what makes both business and ecological sense. Under these pressures, from many sources at many different levels of power, decision-making can be either paralysed or pushed into unsatisfactory directions. The challenge of knowledge management is to understand how to create practical solutions to support individuals and groups as they generate or acquire this multi-faceted knowledge so as to suit the particular requirements of their application context (Gurteen 1998, Armistead 1999, Alexander et al 1991, Storey and Barnett 2000, Despres and Chauvel 1999, and Coulson-Thomas 1997). Organisations must also grow the capability to share knowledge between specialisms and across internal and external boundaries (Quintas 2002). The ability to generate new technological knowledge is now viewed to be linked to a specific learning capability which draws from diverse knowledge bases and is able to activate a systemic recombination process (Antonelli, 1999). In all these, identifying the sets of knowledge that will make the greatest difference, where they reside and how they can be accessed and exploited for team, organisational and communal benefits are fundamental. This is integral to the issue of knowledge mapping. The principal purpose and clearest benefit of a knowledge map is to show people in an organisation or within a network/supply chain where to go when they need expertise. A knowledge map can also serve as an inventory. It is a ‘picture’ of what exists in an organisation or a ‘network’ of where it is located. It therefore can be used as a tool to evaluate the corporate knowledge stock (e.g. knowledge for sustainability) revealing strengths to be exploited and gaps that need to be filled (Davenport and Prusak, 1998). The dynamics of knowledge management can be just as important, particularly where change is an important issue. Dynamic approaches to modelling and mapping consider the flow of knowledge - how it is created, distributed and accessed - as much as the knowledge itself. To this end, the transition work sought to appraise the options for knowledge mapping tools which would meet this need. The results would then be used as the basis for selection and implementation of tools in the main study if successful. At the same time, a structured method to assess and evaluate the efficacy of these knowledge mapping tools against some identified criteria was developed.Key Advances and Supporting MethodologyThe key advances delivered will be presented against the research objectives set out in the grant proposal.Appraise the options (i.e. tools) for dynamic approaches to modelling and mapping knowledge, which consider the flow of knowledge for sustainability - how it is created, distributed and accessed.Through a thorough review of literature and discussions with industrial partners, software developers and trainers involved in knowledge mapping, seventeen key knowledge mapping tools and techniques were identified; each having its strengths and weaknesses in different contexts. These knowledge mapping tools and techniques are: concept maps, mind map/idea map, conceptcircle diagram, semantic map, cognitive map, process map, social mess map or cross boundary causality map, conceptual map and knowledge flow map. Others are ontology, Petri-net, cluster vee diagram, thesauri, visual thinking network, topic map and perceptual map. The application and schematic presentation of these knowledge mapping tools and techniques are in the final study report (). Also documented in the study report is how knowledge maps have come about in organisations (the first time they have been used, the level of access staff have in their use; and how pervasive they have been used). The study revealed that many of these tools and techniques are not widely used in the construction industry. The market solutions (off the peg tools /techniques) are perceived not to offer added value; and are likely to exceed the company’s requirements. Many organisations prefer instead to invest in in-house development of intranets and other IT enabled tools. They also rely on techniques long established in the firms. Table 1 presents the most used knowledge mapping tools/ techniques and which are perceived to be most successful by construction industry actors and software developers. The study also revealed that the industry actively uses different combinations of nine out of the seventeen (i.e. those in Table 1).The dynamic mapping of knowledge requires the identification of temporal properties of the content elements and of ways to map them in a dynamic manner. Examples of temporal properties of maps are time, duration, or behaviour. All the tools and techniques investigated might present dynamic characteristics (adaptable to change) however, the cost of adjustment to change (time) may prove prohibitive in some cases. It is therefore necessary to consider the cost benefit analysis prior to designing or choosing the tool/technique. Knowledge mapping activity needs to constantly re-evaluate the location of actors within the network of firms, their relative importance and significance within the interdependences and hierarchies of the division of labour. Firms and institutions need to find out if the individuals with higher stocks of technical and tacit knowledge have a relevant place in the social organisation of the firm/institution, and this relevant place is a central role in the network. The mapping instrument has to fulfil three needs to achieve a satisfactory level of dynamic modelling. Firstly, the need to depict over time the relations that are most representative or central; secondly, the need to make relative assumptions as to the “richness of the social interactions” since individuals with high technical ability might not have, at the same time, a superior stock of social interventions. Thirdly, the need to evaluate the capabilities that for a given moment are more relevant to the firm, and are usually associated with global strategies (integrated in relative competitive positioning) such as profit maximisation, cost minimisation subject to environmental, social and financial constraints.S/NO Knowledge Mapping Tools/ Techniques Construction Industry Actors Software Developer1.Casual Map2.Cognitive Map3.Concept Map4.Knowledge Flow Map5.Mind/ Idea Map6.Perceptual Map7.Process Map8.Semantic Map9.Social Mess MapTable 1: Most used knowledge mapping tools/ techniques in the industry and which are perceived to be successful Develop a structured assessment to evaluate these knowledge mapping tools and techniques against stated study requirements. The study also sought to ascertain the efficacy of the knowledge mapping tools and techniques; document what factors are being considered by users in choosing and using knowledge mapping tools/techniques. The distinction between knowledge mapping tools and techniques is that the former is IT enabled. The key factors considered by users of knowledge mapping tools and techniques in the construction industry are robustness, cost, user friendliness, dynamism, the low level of training needed before their use, the degree of positive impact the tool/technique is likely to make on their businesses (processes, services and products) as well as their level of flexibility and adaptability. Table 2 summarises the perceptions of those interviewed with regard to how they evaluated the nine most used tools/techniques. The three scales of ‘High’, ‘Medium’ and ‘Low’ were used in the evaluation. For example, the Social Mess Map technique was rated high in terms of robustness, cost, user friendliness but low in terms of how adaptable or flexible it is.The information gleaned from the analysis of the semi-structured interviews with construction industry personnel and software developers was useful in the development of the generic knowledge mapping model.Test and refine the generic model of knowledge mapping for sustainability, which would form the basis for the main study.An important objective of the Transition project was to develop, test and refine a generic knowledge mapping model for sustainability. In developing the model four main issues were seen as important. These were (1) simplicity (2) pragmatism (3) dynamism and (4) ability to consider the why, who, what and where of knowledge mapping. Figure 1 presents the generic model of knowledge mapping developed. In considering the triple bottom line of sustainability (Economic, Social and Environmental), the model uses a five (5) step approach to address the main issues of knowledge mapping. The first step is about setting out knowledge mapping goals (why knowledge mapping? – i.e. making a business case). The second stage is to identify knowledge needs (what currently exist and what knowledge assets are needed?). The third stage identifies the knowledge gap that needs to be addressed. This is followed by the need to either capture and/or create appropriate knowledge to fill the identified gap (step 4). This then leads to step 5 where the knowledge has to be leveraged, exploited and retained as need be. These five steps have feed forward andbackward loops allowing the possibility for evaluation and improvements at each stage. In this way it is able to cater for the dynamic nature of knowledge in different contexts. The details and explanations of the processes of each of the stages are in the final study report ().Knowledge Mapping Tools/ TechniquesEvaluation Criteria CasualMapCognitiveMapConceptMapKnowledgeFlow MapMind/IdeaMapPerceptualMapProcessMapSemanticMapSocialMessMapRobustness Medium Low High High High Medium High High HighCost Low Medium Low Low Medium Low Low High HighUserFriendlinessHigh Medium Medium High Medium High Medium High High Dynamism Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Training Low Low Medium Low Medium Low Medium Low Low Impact Medium Medium Low Medium High Medium High Medium High Adaptability Medium Medium Low Low Low Medium Low Medium Low Table 2: Structured assessment for knowledge mapping tools / techniques - Construction Industry PerspectiveImportant lessons and helpful hints have been identified in our development of the generic model which allows us to make useful recommendations for the benefit of industry and academia. Some of these lessons and recommendations were planned to be carried forward to the main bid. The most important ingredient for effective knowledge mapping is the ‘right’ people who understand the processes or knowledge domain. Knowledge maps can be as sophisticated or as simple as a team/organisation wants them to be. From a pragmatic point of view, there are instances where a process map, flip chart, sticky notes, Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint and Visio software and the right people are all a knowledge mapping team needs.Figure 1: A generic model of knowledge mappingThere are few things that a knowledge mapping team needs to pay due cognisance to – a form of checklist. Firstly, it is important to start with the end in mind by clearly articulating and stating the goal of the knowledge mapping activity/exercise. Secondly, keep the Pareto principle (80/20 rule) in mind – map the most important and frequently used knowledge first. A high level mapping of the process/area that the team/organisation wants to share knowledge around is important. Recruit the right people. Collate all the necessary strategy and policy documents, competency maps and process maps that are needed before starting the exercise. This is to be followed by collating available or previously created database of operating procedures and knowledge sources; and consider recruiting or employing someone with some expertise or working knowledge of readily available software such as MS Excel, Visio, PowerPoint and Word. After the development and use of knowledge maps, it is important to accurately update knowledge maps.To use the opportunity of the transition project to work with industrial collaborators (assembled for the main core-plus project) to select appropriate case projects needed to be investigated during the main bid.The Transition project (Bridging study) provided the opportunity to put together a consortium to apply for the main bid (Revised bid). In all, a consortium of 5 universities (including one involved in one of the proposed PLUS projects), 15 different organisations across industrial sectors, 4 Advisors and 4 Consultants of international reputation. During the Transition project, a model for Knowledge Processes for Sustainability in Urban Environments (KoPSUE) was developed for the main bid. This is presented in Figure 2 and depicts the 5 Core Work Packages (CWP1 – CWP5) as well as the 5 Plus Work Packages (PWP1 –PWP5).Figure 2: The KoPSUE programme showing the interconnectedness of core objectivesCWP1: Knowledge barriers and enabling processes in the construction industryCWP2: Knowledge production, mapping and the promotion of sustainability knowledge in the construction industryCWP3: Knowledge stocks and flows in supply chains - An innovation perspective on sustainable materials for the urban environmentCWP4: Knowledge accumulation and innovation: A comparative study of knowledge creation and application in the construction and automotive industriesCWP5: Management of knowledge and its effects in the construction of a new development in the Thames Gateway ProjectPWP1: Knowledge sharing within and across utility sectorsPWP2: Mapping and evaluating sustainability knowledge in communities PWP3: Locational specificities of sustainability knowledgePWP4: The role of sustainability knowledge for transition managementPWP5: Urban sustainability: knowledge, evidence and futures - making existing sustainable technologies and practices economically viable in the environment of large-scale property development.Through the cooperation and support of the assembled industrial partners for the main bid, appropriate case studies whereidentified for each of the core and plus projects. Unfortunately, the application for support for the main bid was not successful.PlusPackagesPWP1PWP2PWP3PWP4PWP5Arrange and host a workshop for knowledge exchange among users and producers of sustainability knowledge.A successful workshop was hosted in Glasgow and attended by both practitioners and academics/researchers, including researchers from other EPSRC SUE consortia. The workshop was attended by 40 people. The workshop allowed the developed generic model to be tested and eventually refined. It also provided the opportunity to disseminate the outputs of the Transition project study. Disseminate outputs of the scoping study and transition project widely. This will include the production of a 5-page pamphlet on "the "Role of Knowledge Communication and Knowledge Mapping in Sustainable Urban Environment"The outputs of the scoping study have continuously been disseminated to industry and to the academia community – nationally and internationally (EPSRC Final Report - GR/S18588/01). To date, the findings and lessons drawn from the Transition project have directly led to workshops, seminars, lecture materials and academic publications (See below - Research Impact and Benefits to Society Further Research and Dissemination Activities). A pamphlet on the key findings of the study has been developed and being disseminated to targeted industrialists and academics.Supporting Research MethodologyFigure 3: Transition Project Research MethodologyThe overall research process used in the Transition Project is given in Figure 3.The project was given direction through its ‘research aims and identifiable objectives’. A combination of research strategies (literature review, semi-structured interviews, and workshop) was adopted as proposed. A total of 18 semi-structured interviews were conducted. Of these, fourteen (14) were with Construction industry personnel (architects, main contractors and developers) and four (4) were with software developers. The data from the interviews were primarily analysed using content analysis. The workshop conducted was useful in testing the developed model as well as the structured method for evaluating/assessing the efficacy of knowledge mapping techniques.Project Plan and ReviewThere were no changes made to the initial objectives. All the objectives were duly met. The research methodology was also adhered to as planned. We had successful Steering Committee Meetings and Researchers’ meetings which were very well attended. Despite the distance differences, communication by e-mail, and tele-conferencing amongst the researchers, co-investigators and industrial partners worked very well. A very successful workshop was held in Glasgow (Scotland) involving industry and academics. Some researchers from the wider EPSRC SUE consortia also attended. Senior personnel from non-academic organisations and the research team made up the project’s Steering Committee. These Steering Group meetings were held monthly as planned, and the Researcher meetings held fortnightly. The venues (London, Cambridge, Manchester and Glasgow) of the meeting were rotated and held at institutions of the participating academic institutions. The level of support and cooperation from industrial partners from start to finish is worthy of note. Indeed, this was exceptional, and gratefully received. It is also worthy of note that the relationship built up with these industrialists continue as we work towards putting a bid in the upcoming EPSRC SUE 2 call for bids.Research Impact and Benefits to SocietyThe actual/expected impacts of the Transition Project findings for key stakeholders are identified as:(i) Collaborating firms: The organisations that have collaborated in the study and have taken part in Steering Group meetings as well as organisations that have participated in the interview phase of the study have benefited tangibly from the sharing ofknowledge and experience, from the meetings supported during the study and from the successful workshop (attended by 40 delegates) held in Glasgow. The collaborative project has enabled at least two of the organisations to consider the role of knowledge and knowledge mapping as part of the work they do on sustainability.(ii). Generators and users of sustainability knowledge: The workshop (in Glasgow) involved different stakeholders, generators and users of sustainability knowledge. These stakeholders have benefited from the findings of the study. Copies of the outputs of the study have been pasted on a dedicated web-site developed for the study (). Interestingly, for one of the industrial partners, the study prompted a meeting attended by their Senior Executives to explore the importance and role of Knowledge Management and Mapping in their business.(iii). Research/Academic community: Findings from the Transition Project have already been fed into a postgraduate course [Module: “Integration and Scope Management” of the MSc in “International Project Management” at Glasgow Caledonian University] under the lecture title “Learning from Projects and Managing Project Knowledge for Successful Project Outcomes”. The Module is lead by the Principal Investigator.Several articles (6 refereed papers) have also been published in national and international conferences from the findings of the Transition project, with some more planned for the future (4 refereed papers). A study report is produced and pasted on the study website (). The training acquired from the employment of different research techniques, training on interviewing skills, skills of writing conference and journal papers and presentation skills have been very valuable to the researchers. One of the researchers has moved on, gaining a full-time lectureship position in a UK academic institution. Another two have also gained research positions in academic institutions in the UK. They have since informed us that their experiences on the project were important in gaining their new employment.Further Research and Dissemination ActivitiesDetails of the project, and its achievements and deliverables have already been presented to academics and industry in seminars, workshop and in conferences at local (Glasgow), national (Liverpool), and international levels (South Africa; Portugal). In total, approximately 500 people have attended presentations in which some aspects of the findings of the Transition Project have been presented. To date, six peer reviewed conference papers have been published. The abstracts of another four conference papers have been submitted and these have been accepted. These are to be published in 2006. Details are given in the attached IGR Form. Two Journal papers are also currently being written. A Pamphlet on the “Role of Knowledge Communication and Knowledge Mapping in Urban Sustainability” has been produced. This is being sent out to over 1,500 individuals and organisations (including Sustainability Centres in the UK; representatives of large and small construction organisations in the UK; representatives of Professional Organisations in the Construction Industry- CIRIA, CIOB, BSRIA, RIBA, APM; representatives of all EPSRC SUE Consortia; targeted academics and researchers in the UK and Overseas. There are two planned Workshops in 2006 organised by the Centre for the Built Environment, Glasgow, Scotland to further disseminate the findings of the study. A dedicated website () has been created for the study and populated with study outputs and links to other relevant sites and materials. Explanation of ExpenditureThe expenditure was carefully controlled and the research team adhered to the planned budget. There was an under-spend, primarily due to the delay in the employment of a Research Assistant on the project and savings from budgeted fees on consultants. The finance Office at Glasgow Caledonian University will be sending the relevant FES form to EPSRC.ReferencesAlexander P A, Schallert DL and Hare VC (1991) Coming to terms: How researchers in learning and literacy talk about knowledge, Review of educational research, 61 n3 pages 315-343Antonelli, C (1999) Communication and innovation: the evidence within technological districts, International Conference: Knowledge Spillovers and The Geography of Innovation, A Comparison of National Systems of Innovation July 1--2Armistead C (1999) Knowledge management and process performance, Journal of Knowledge Management 3 n2 143-154 Coulson-Thomas C J (1997). The future of the organisation: selected knowledge management issues, Journal of Knowledge Management 1 n1 15-26Brundtland, G.O. (1987) “Our Common Future (The Brundtland Report). The World Commission on Environment and Development.Davenport, T. H. and Prusak, L. (1998) Working Knowledge. Harvard Business School Press. Boston Massachusetts, USA. Despres, C and Chauvel, D (1999) Knowledge management(s), Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 110-120 Gurteen D (1998) Knowledge, creativity and innovation, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 2, No.1, pp. 5-13Parkin, S. (2000) “Context and Drivers for Operationalising Sustainable Development. Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE), November, pp. 9 – 15.Quintas, P. (2002) ‘Implications of the Division of Knowledge for Innovation in Networks’, in J. de la Mothe and A.N. Link (eds.) Networks, Alliances and Partnerships in the Innovation Process, Kluwer Academic Press, Boston, pp 135-162.Storey J and Barnett E (2000) Knowledge management initiatives: learning from failure, Journal of KnowledgeVan Beveren J (2002) 'A model of knowledge acquisition that refocuses knowledge management', Journal of Knowledge Management 6, No1, 18-22.。