Moving forward with project management
a knowledge management methodology
Parviz F. Rad, PhD, PE, CCE, PMP, Project Management Excellence
“Uncertainty is the defining characteristic of today's strategic environment” (Department of Defense, 2005). This means that knowledge is more than ever viewed as a strategic asset. As a result, project management and knowledge management (KM) are both a necessity to lead to an improved competitive advantage for each organization. There are many commonalities between the two, and in fact, it can be argued that project management is a part of KM or KM is a part of project management. Regardless, both are important for overall organizational success, as well as for portfolio, program, and individual project success. Project management practices can facilitate the attention and dedication to KM. KM practices can enhance overall project management success in terms of fulfilling goals of the client, the performing organization, and the team. With KM embedded into the enterprise's project management methodology, the success rate of projects can only improve.
Knowledge assets have been recognized for some time as an organization's most valuable resource. Earlier known as information resource management, KM is viewed as the way to enhance productivity and increase profitability if knowledge assets are used effectively in each organization. The difficulty, though, is that while everyone possesses some key knowledge in an organization, it typically is not shared, even though people realize that if everyone made their knowledge assets available to others, it would definitely serve the organization, as it then could be used to lead to exemplary performance. Most knowledge assets are not articulated. It is too easy to focus on hoarding knowledge or considering knowledge to be power, rather than leveraging the power of knowledge as an integral part of project management.
A cultural change, therefore, is required so that knowledge assets are regularly shared in an easy-to-use format and so KM becomes part of one's daily work. This culture change then shifts to one in which everyone looks at a knowledge asset and considers how it might benefit others in the organization. The emphasis becomes one in which there is a need to share, connecting people to people, and people to knowledge. Each person must be able to easily find the knowledge assets that exist and be able to use them. To have value, knowledge assets must be distributed throughout the organization and applied when needed. The use of knowledge assets that are readily and easily available can only lead to improved project management effectiveness and efficiency. Those organizations that excel in the use of KM are the ones that have embraced it through a cultural change and can easily translate each employee's intellectual capital into applications to support innovation in products and services and ultimate transformation.
The Importance of Historical Data in Project Management
Portfolios, programs, and projects constitute a wealth of knowledge as knowledge assets not only are created, but are used, shared, and stored. Historical data are a necessity, because projects are unique undertakings to be completed in as short a time as is feasible and often with limited budgets and resources. Many times, members of a project team have not worked together before, and with virtual teams a necessity in today's global environment, team members may never meet face-to-face on a project. Through the collocated or virtual team structure, with KM in use by the team, rich communication and collaboration can only result. The importance of historical data and an emphasis on knowledge sharing and KM cannot be understated. In the Project Management Institute's (PMI) Standard for Program Management (2006), historical data are considered an input common to most of the program management processes. It describes items such as artifacts, metrics, risks, and estimates as examples. This standard notes the importance of use of historical information concerning successes, failures, and lessons learned for program planning and management. PMI in A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) (2004) states that historical information are “documents and data on prior projects, including project files, records, correspondence, closed contracts, and closed projects” (p. 362).
The Importance of Lessons Learned in Project Management
Each project is an opportunity for learning; similarly, each project, by its definition of something that is temporary and unique, is also a change management initiative. As noted by Ernst &Young (2007), many successful organizations fail to realize full value from their investments in projects by not learning lessons in the process. This further means that organizations then fail to continue those processes that were successful in the process and fail to discontinue those that resulted in errors and rework.
What is a Lesson Learned?
PMI (2004) defines lessons learned as “the learning gained from the process of performing the project” (p. 363), It has long been recognized that lessons learned are significant on projects, and also that they should be collected throughout the project or program life cycle. The PMBOK® Guide notes they may be collected at any time. Most project practitioners recognize the importance of doing so before personnel leave the project, to ensure that knowledge assets are captured before they are forgotten.
Many organizations establish key check points to collect lessons learned in their program and project life cycles, but often they are not conducted, as there is too much pressure to complete the existing work in progress. Ernst and Young (2007), in a survey in conjunction with PMI, noted that the key obstacle to conducting lessons learned sessions is “too little time” (p. 3). Another conclusion from this survey is that many feel that often these sessions are not carried out objectively, as people may be reluctant to openly communicate anything other than a success. However, it is difficult to determine what people should create and capture, and also it is difficult to know whether the specific knowledge assets that are collected will be valuable ones for others in the organization.
Lessons Learned and the PMBOK® Guide and the Standard for Program Management
The PMBOK® Guide states that the “Project Management Body of Knowledge is the sum of knowledge within the profession of project management” (PMI, 2004, p. 3). It further explains that while it includes traditional practices of project management that have been applied successfully, it also includes emerging innovative practices. As a result, PMI implies that the PMBOK® is continually evolving. Reich and Wee (2006) performed an extensive review of the PMBOK® Guide and noted it contained 47 explicit knowledge objects, defined as an object containing knowledge in which the knowledge is articulated and codified (pp. 13–14). One of the conclusions of their research is that the PMBOK® Guide definitely emphasizes the use of knowledge from experts and recognizes the need to use lessons learned in subsequent processes. They suggest highlighting lessons learned further as a step toward greater project-based learning.
The Standard for Program Management (2006) notes that lessons learned are an output common to many program management processes. This Standard states, “lessons learned include causes of variances from the program management plan, corrective actions taken and their outcomes, risk mitigations, and other information of value to management and stakeholders of future programs” (p. 34). It describes the need to continually collect them throughout the program life cycle.
Usefulness of Lessons Learned Reviews
In the 2007 Ernst & Young survey (reported by Ernst & Young but conducted during a PMI meeting in October 2006), 91% of the respondents stated that lessons learned reviews were helpful, but only 13% actually performed these reviews. In this survey, 42% of the respondents said that post-implementation reviews were performed only on projects that were high-profile ones or on ones with known problems in their execution. It further notes the need to ensure that these sessions are not used for compliance, to point fingers, or only to meet a requirement with the results then put on the shelf or in a folder on a shared drive. They also need to be conducted before the team is disbanded.
What is Knowledge Management?
A universal definition for KM is not in place like that for project management in the PMBOK® Guide. Quintas, Lefrere, and Jones (1997) defined KM as managing the processes to create and apply knowledge. They also noted that KM must consider organization, human, and technological aspects to ensure there is successful enterprise support. Maier and Lehner (2000) described it as the creation and maintenance of a knowledge base for the organization. Paulzen and Perc (2002) stated that KM is the management of knowledge processes to support business processes, and involves mapping knowledge processes to support the organization's knowledge base. The Dictionary of Accounting Terms (Siegel & Shim, 2005) describes KM as “The process of connecting people to people and people to information to create a competitive advantage.” This definition, because of its emphasis on people, will be used throughout this paper.
Why is KM Important to Project Management?
Reich (2007) explained that with the definition of projects as temporary undertakings, there is considerable knowledge processing. She stateed that in transformational-type projects, with diverse team members with different specialty areas, “The project manager's primary task is to manage the knowledge bases of the team members and stakeholders so that they combine in the best possible way to successfully accomplish their assignment” (p. 6). She further noteed that team members must learn how to transfer knowledge to others and to create “shared understandings at the right time and for the right cost” (p. 6). This led to one of her conclusions that both project and individual learnings are critical to project success along with effective knowledge creation and dissemination. Cioffi (2002) noteed that project management focuses on improving the performance of projects by emphasizing process improvement, while KM focuses on improving the effectiveness and efficiency of all disciplines throughout the enterprise.
People in each organization must be able to retrieve needed information, make it available to others, and share it across the organization and possibly with customers, suppliers, and valued partners. This means that each individual must want to share his or her knowledge with others to benefit the entire organization. Project team members must also emphasize knowledge sharing as a routine way of working in order to coordinate their expertise and to be able to easily locate others who can best support the goals and objectives of their project quickly and easily.
A Knowledge Management Methodology for Project Management
A KM methodology, as part of the overall project management methodology, can improve the overall practice of project management. KM must be embedded throughout the project management life cycle. It should be an explicit goal stated in program and project charters, and knowledge sharing should be a goal stated in team charters.
Goals and Objectives
First, the project management methodology must emphasize KM as an explicit goal. A focus on KM represents changes in functions, processes, and overall behavior. As Rad and Anantatmula (2005) stated, “Integrating KM and project management is necessary to manage project knowledge effectively and to help organizations improve their project performance” (p. 242). The first step is to determine what is meant by success and how KM can assist organizations in reaching their strategic goals.
Approaches for Methodology Development
The American Productivity & Quality Center (APQC) provides several suggestions. First, APQC recommends that KM be defined in a way that everyone can understand what it means. This may require that some case studies be presented, and it also requires alignment with corporate strategy. The next step is to develop a strategy to begin to incorporate KM into each person's activities by preparing a KM plan. Extending this concept to project management, the Enterprise Project Management Office (EPMO) could take the lead in preparing this plan, but for effectiveness and buy-in, it should have input from people throughout the organization. APQC also suggests use of pilot projects to show the value of KM. Then, the KM initiative should be expanded through preparation of a strategy that is marketed throughout the organization. The final step is to institutionalize it in the organization, which may require some organizational restructuring, such as the establishment of a Knowledge Management Office or a knowledge strategist/knowledge broker position. Extending this concept to project management, the knowledge strategist could be a senior-level staff member reporting to the Director of the EPMO, along with other staff members for support.
An Emphasis on People
Often KM initiatives focus on technology, rather than focusing on people. As Jackson (2006) stated, the emphasis should be on learning by doing, not just providing an information technology solution, but instead providing a people solution, even though information technology is a necessary part of KM. KM must be viewed as a balance between people, processes, and tools.
A Governance Structure
PMI (2006) notes the importance of a governance structure for program management as a central theme. This means that there is a governance board or steering committee that provides a framework for decision making and achieving goals in a consistent manner. This governance structure is an integral part of the organization's governance and includes portfolio and project management. It further supports the organization's investments and provides a way to monitor the achievement of benefits. It provides decisions at stage gate or phase reviews. Such reviews can also be used to promote KM. At each review session, the governance board can explicitly ask about the information sharing that has occurred to date, and the use of knowledge assets, as a decision is made to proceed to the next phase in the life cycle.
Additionally, corporate strategy and corporate culture must be considered. The level of the organization's maturity must be assessed to determine the organizational readiness and support for KM. Such an assessment can show where the organization stands in terms of leadership, technology, processes, culture, communications, and a team approach. A mature organization is important to ensure employees will contribute knowledge assets and will benefit from the contributions of others. A reference for a maturity assessment can follow that of PMI's Organizational Project Management Maturity Model (OPM3), with KM being a best practice for portfolios, programs, and projects. As a Best Practice, it would be part of the process improvement stages of standardize, measure, control, and continuously improve. It further would be included in each of the process groups: initiating, planning, executing, monitoring and controlling, and closing. The Best Practices would contain specific capabilities, outcomes, and Key Performance Indicators.
However, KM cannot succeed unless the knowledge assets are quality ones. People will see KM as adding value if they can easily locate high-quality information. This means that as part of the project management life cycle, from initiating through closing, the type of knowledge assets to be shared must be considered. The organization needs to state the key areas of interest—successes, failures, best practices, new innovations, client information, competitor information, supplier information, and so forth.
Once the type of knowledge assets to share is identified, its level of quality must also be determined. People must be dedicated to review the knowledge assets that are contributed to see if they truly add value, and to review existing knowledge assets to determine whether they continue to add value to the organization and to project teams. Project practitioners must be able to easily locate both knowledge—such as policies, regulations, templates, lessons learned, and experts—on demand, at any time, from any location, with confidence that the information is valid and relevant. This requires a commitment to designate a team member to be responsible not only to see that knowledge assets are contributed but also to evaluate their worth. The EPMO, through its KM staff, is the organization to provide guidance in this area and possibly to serve as the moderator for knowledge assets for project management. As a moderator, the KM staff would ensure that knowledge assets for use in the organization are current and would be responsible for archiving or deleting any content that is no longer considered useful.
As organizations continue to embrace virtual teams as the organizational strategy, an effective KM program can work to promote greater collaboration among the team members by reducing an “us versus them” mentality and by promoting ease of access to key subject matter experts across the organization. Further, since most project team members typically do not possess all of the needed information, membership in a community can assist in knowledge sharing and can promote collaboration. Communities extend both an individual's knowledge and that of the members of the project team to additional people, who may possess needed expertise. Such outside sources may provide the needed technical knowledge to ensure the project benefits from the best expertise available in the organization. Through membership in a community, people can work collectively to generate and implement innovative ideas. An active community can promote a sense of teamwork that can then promote more of a sense of belonging in the organization, so that people are more likely to work toward organizational success and remain with the organization rather than moving to a new organization when things may not go according to plan. A safe environment in which open communication is the norm is required. Each community then needs a charter that states whether there are limits as to who can view which knowledge assets, and can further ensure that data privacy and security laws are not violated.
This means a systematic method to create, approve, publish, measure, archive, or delete content is required. Community members work together rather than in isolation and highlight key content to share with their members. A method to communicate the content that is available is required, along with numerous methods to share information. Then, when a project is in the initiating stage, the first step is to see if the community has specific knowledge assets that will be beneficial. The team also has a process to continually check the knowledge assets that have been created at the stage-gate reviews, to see if they should be added to the repository, ensuring that security, confidentiality, and privacy issues are not a concern. Communities alert members when new content is available. An integrated content life cycle becomes part of the project management life cycle. A corporate commitment to collaborative knowledge-sharing processes can also assist in this process.
Tools and Techniques
In order for KM to be considered meaningful, easy-to-use tools and techniques are required with knowledge-sharing platforms and repositories set up for each community. These KM tools and techniques should be integrated with the project management software that is used. Virtual, online spaces for collaboration are established through portals and other forums. Standard technologies are also required throughout the organization. For example, if the project control officer prepares and maintains a project schedule using Primavera, Microsoft Project, or another project management software package, everyone on the team and in the organization should have the ability to easily view and use it. Project status reports must be prepared as required and should be available to all team members. Each time the schedule is updated, team members should know that it has been changed. The portal, along with the project management information system, then can provide an easy way to not only submit information but also to access information.
Locations and methods to contribute and store templates, best practices, and guidelines must be available and communicated. A number of different information-sharing channels can assist, such as postings in workspaces, in discussion forums or blogs, and the use of webinars, white papers, and training sessions. Each person then can share information in real time through collaboration spaces and discussion forums. With a common interface, people can submit updates, the project manager can review status to date, the project control officer can update the schedule and other key documents such as the action-item register, benefits register, and the risk register, and others on the team can see the progress that has accrued. This enables everyone of the team to see success to date and only can increase motivation and morale. Further, with the use of metadata, users can find relevant documents easily regardless of whether they are involved as a portfolio manager, a program manager, a member of the core program team, a project manager, or a member of the project team. Other key stakeholders, such as the program sponsor and members of the governance board, also can then easily find key information.
A Continuous Process to Follow
Considering the project management life cycle as outlined in the PMBOK® Guide – in which phases are sequential with some type of information transfer and define the work to be done in each phase, the deliverables required, the people involved, and the methods to control and approve each phase – a KM content creation process can be imbedded in each phase. Typical phases of the project management life cycle are initial, intermediate, and final.
In the initial phase of the project management life cycle, official content in the organization, such as policies, procedures, and guidelines, need review. Such content should be available on the portal and should be accessed as part of the need to review standards and regulations as the project charter, scope statement, and project management plan are prepared.
Once the project manager and the core project team have been identified and assigned, as part of the planning process, a human resource management plan is required. This plan should be structured to show the types of skills and competencies that will be needed on the project and to show how the project team will obtain access to key subject matter experts (SMEs) as needed. It is essential to determine early in the project the needed skills so that the resources can then be identified and their availability planned. To do so, KM, with an emphasis on its use in terms of staff profiles as maintained by the EPMO, is invaluable. The core team then can see where these experts are located, and with the project manager and sponsor support, if needed, can then determine whether it will be feasible to obtain help from each needed expert.
Also in the initial phase, the core project team should determine how metadata will be assigned to the knowledge assets that the team creates. Metadata mean data about data or information about something. It is a term that is often misunderstood, but metadata are essential for KM. Metadata serve to provide structured definitions to describe properties of knowledge assets. An example of metadata is the description of a file containing lessons learned about a project, specifying the person who prepared the lessons learned document, the project involved, the date of the project, the date of the document, the customer, and other keyword tags. Its purpose is to help users locate needed knowledge assets. Metadata help promote searches for needed information and help to clarify the context of the knowledge asset so users can easily determine whether or not the knowledge asset will be of value to them. It then avoids the need to sort through numerous assets that may not be needed and can reduce the time required to resolve issues and make decisions. This then will provide a way in which each team member can easily set up a method to create structured content so knowledge assets can be easily accessed during the project and by others in the organization. The metadata to be used can be outlined as part of the project's team charter. The team charter further should emphasize that each individual should regularly create knowledge assets.
Additionally, in the initial phase, a team member should be designated as the project's knowledge broker. This team member would interface with the KM specialist in the EPMO. He or she would serve as the moderator for knowledge assets that are created during the project and would review content that is created prior to posting it on the portal or other forum. The moderator would also set up a workflow process to be used during the project, one that ends with a final version of the knowledge asset that is ready for publication.
Also, as the project's work breakdown structure is prepared, KM should be set up as a work package. Specific KM activities then should be part of the project schedule.
During the intermediate phase of the project management life cycle, content creation becomes a continuous process. Key tools and techniques include interviews at the end of phase reviews, project workshops on key topics, and a review of messages contributed to discussion forums (Ritchie, 2007). The project's Resource Assignment Matrix can be used to show specific responsibilities for content creation, review, approval, and publication. Also during the intermediate phase, methods to push content to members of the project team are needed, and team members also require information about new content that may be relevant to their areas of expertise. The moderator or KM team member can highlight key content to share. The moderator also can review and add to ways to share information within the project team. The moderator also tracks the KM activities in the schedule and updates them. At each of the stage-gate reviews, KM should be part of the agenda to ensure that its activities are tracked, lessons learned are regularly collected, and that KM is a continuous process.
The project manager, in the role of a mentor, can help to establish KM as part of the normal work of the project team. The mentor role is one that often is difficult, as the project manager models the desired team behavior. The project manager can practice knowledge sharing with the team by using minor issues as a way to start the process to then begin knowledge sharing on all issues affecting the project.
In the final stage of the project management life cycle, the lessons-learned review meeting will serve as a way to review the knowledge assets collected during the project and to add to the knowledge repository. Interviews through a structured, detailed debriefing process are one tool and technique to use (Ritchie, 2007). At this point, some of the knowledge assets may be ones that should be deleted or archived; others may need to be added and published for use by future project teams. Some knowledge assets may be ones that are recommended as best practices for consideration by the EPMO. The focus then shifts from knowledge assets to support the specific project in terms of a product or service solution, to one that instead becomes a focus on improved project management processes and an emphasis on value to the organization in terms of innovation and transformation.
Guidelines to Implement KM into Project Management
The EPMO Director, working in conjunction with a KM expert, can drive momentum across the organization for KM. The KM initiative must be managed as a project with a KM plan, milestones, and active monitoring and control. Pilot projects should first be implemented. Strategic communities should be determined and chartered. The EPMO Manager should identify key stakeholders, solicit and analyze their involvement, and prepare and follow a stakeholder management plan so that the benefits of KM are recognized and embraced. A charter for KM is needed just like an EPMO, program, or project charter. It should show how the business objectives will benefit from KM, specific roles and responsibilities, guidelines for managing change, key performance indicators, and critical success factors, with signoffs by the KM team member, project manager, EPMO Director, members of the governance board, and so forth.
Roles and Responsibilities
Ideally, executive-level support can facilitate the process of inculcating KM into one's daily work. Such sponsorship can emphasize that KM is a mandatory activity. It also can be presented in a way so that it is viewed as an essential process to achieve strategic objectives and focuses on continual improvement in all areas. KM must be owned by each individual and ingrained into the behavior of each employee. The goal is to make KM an integral part of each business’ strategies so that knowledge is transferred into action for the organization. A positive attitude by executives can transcend the organization, and people then will view KM as a high-priority, strategic initiative.
In order to facilitate such a culture change to KM, the EPMO is the logical organization to manage the transition to a culture that embraces knowledge sharing and the use of KM throughout the daily work of each project professional. The EPMO also provides the necessary investment and funding to support KM, as it is the organization to train project professionals in KM concepts, policies, and processes. The EPMO also will incorporate KM into its project management methodology. With the EPMO, organizational learning, as reflected through KM, becomes part of the overall enterprise functions and strategy. It can then enable continuous learning and process improvement by integrating KM techniques with project management techniques.
Communities of Practice
Additionally, the EPMO establishes communities of practice throughout the organization; each community will have its own knowledge needs, which the EPMO then can coordinate and leverage. It further ensures that there is active participation among community members. As Anantatmula (2004) stated, with the EPMO integrating the communities of practice, it can then promote the key outcomes of KM—enhanced communication, improved collaboration, and improvements in employee skills.
Communities thus are the way to easily experience and acquire needed knowledge assets in areas of interest. Wenger and Synder (1999) noted that communities of practice contribute to strategic direction, create new business opportunities, solve problems quickly, transfer best practices, develop professional skills, and help companies retain talent. Wenger, McDermott, and Snyder (2002) defined communities of practice as “groups of people who share a concern, a set of problems, or a passion about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and expertise in this area by interacting on an ongoing basis” (p. 4). As they further explain, these communities of practice are everywhere, and with knowledge as the key to success, communities of practice serve as a way to manage knowledge as an asset to the organization.
The EPMO is the focal point to ensure that these communities support the vision of the organization and are established as required. It provides organizational support for communities and resources for their success. With each community, a unique body of knowledge is developed, which in turn leads to an overall improvement in the organization's project management methodology, processes, tools, and techniques. It further can provide a structure for phase reviews, project reviews and audits, and a method for structured dialogue on key areas of interest and best practices in project management.
Organizing and Managing
Existing processes must be documented and analyzed to determine which ones require improvements. Tools are needed to store, share, and retrieve knowledge assets, as well as to comment on project documentation, issues, risks, and benefit realization. Technologies such as collaborative software systems can also be used to store historical documents and conduct meetings.
All stakeholders, including customers, suppliers, and partners as appropriate, need to be part of the process to ensure that KM practices are incorporated into the enterprise's project management practice. Key success factors are to implement a learning culture in the organization and to reward and recognize its success. Many people may not wish to participate even if it is a corporate mandate to do so. Until such time as KM is part of each person's daily life, some type of formal incentive program is a critical component for a KM initiative. This is required because some people will continue to have the knowledge-is-power syndrome and believe knowledge means job security (Terra & Gordon, 2003). The more mature organizations recognize instead that sharing knowledge is power, as it helps the organization reach and sustain a competitive advantage.
Often, people say they might share knowledge assets, but this is an afterthought to do so, and at times, if it is done at all, it is relegated to work at night or on weekends. Since KM typically is not part of one's performance plan, people lack incentives to contribute. They may not see the personal benefit of knowledge sharing. However, other incentives can be implemented. They can include items such as KM wins, Contributor of the Month, a point system such as those for frequent flyer miles, recognition on the corporate portal, and so forth. Terra and Gordon (2003) further explained that more mature organizations have a feedback loop as part of the performance appraisal process on leadership activities related to knowledge sharing, so that everyone is accountable for creating best practices to help achieve enhanced, global performance. People must feel that they can openly share what they have learned without fear of reprisal; they must not feel that by participating in knowledge sharing their own performance, salary, and career may be in jeopardy.
The EPMO can set up a process as part of a team-based reward and recognition system to support a learning climate within each project team and the organization. This process can not only recognize the key technical team member who created a breakthrough product or designed a method for more effective service delivery, but also can reward the individual who worked with these SMEs to share their expertise in terms of knowledge assets throughout the organization.
A Focus on Continuous Improvement
Desouza, Awazu, and Wan (2006) explained that a complex approach is not effective. People need to be able to access knowledge assets easily. For usability, the statement of purpose and benefit of each knowledge asset must be explicitly stated. At times, employees should be surveyed to rate the usefulness of knowledge assets to their daily work to continually enhance the project management/KM process.
Opportunities and Summary—KM Linked With Project Management is a Sustainable Advantage
The benefits of KM are numerous but are difficult to quantify in typical ways. Benefits range from ones that are strategic, such as improving customer relationship management and promoting creativity, which in turn affects overall strategic direction, to ones that can reduce the cost and loss of intellectual assets as employees leave the organization. With an integration of KM into project management, information can be shared throughout each project and program as well as with the entire organization. Overall personal effectiveness can be improved, and collaboration with others in the organization will lead to enterprise effectiveness and innovation for overall strategic goals and direction. The integration of project management and KM further can promote long-term, organizational change as best practices are disseminated.
American Productivity and Quality Center. Creating a knowledge-sharing culture. Consortium Benchmarking Study Best-Practice Report. Retrieved on May 2, 2007 from http://www.apqc.org/portal/apqc/ksn?paf_gear_id=contentgearhome&paf_dm=full&pageselect=detail&docid=102749
Anantatmula, V. (2004) Criteria for measuring knowledge management efforts in organizations. UMI Dissertation Services (UMI No. 3123064).
Chin, P. (2005). Knowledge sharing: The facts and the myths, part I and part II. Retrieved on May 31, 2007 from http://www.intranetjournal.com/articles/200502/pij_02_08_05a.html
Cioffi, D. (2002). Managing project integration. Vienna, VA: Management Concepts.
Desouza, K., Yukika A., & Yun W. (2005, October). Factors governing the consumption of explicit knowledge. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57.1, 36–43. Retrieved on April 20, 2007 from http://www.asis.org/Publications/JASIS/jasis.html
Department of Defense. (2005). The national defense strategy of the United States of America. Retrieved on June 10, 2007 from www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/dod/nds-usa_mar2005.htm
Ernst & Young. (2007). Profiting from experience. Retrieved on June 17, 2007 from http://www.ey.com/uk
Jackson, P. (April 2006). Strategies to integrate CoPs into business operations: Focus on Lockheed Martin. E-Gov Knowledge Management Conference 2006. Washington, DC.
Maier, R., & Lehner, F. (2000). Perspectives on knowledge management systems – Theoretical framework and design of an empirical study. Proceedings of the 8th European Conference on Information Systems, 685–693.
Paulzen, O., & Perc, P. (2002). A maturity model for quality improvement in knowledge management. In Wenn, A., McGrath, M., & Burstein, F. (Eds), Enabling organisations and society through information systems, Proceedings of the 13th Australiasian Conference on Information Systems, 243–253.
Project Management Institute. (2004). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) (2004 ed.). Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
Project Management Institute. (2003). Organizational project management maturity model. (OPM3) knowledge foundation. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
Project Management Institute. (2006). The standard for program management. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
Qunitas, P., Lefrere, P., & Jones, G. (1997). Knowledge management: A strategic agenda. Long Range Planning, 30, 385–391.
Rad, P. F., & Levin, G. (2007). Enhancing project management value. Manuscript in preparation.
Rad, P. F., & Anantatmula, V. S. (2005). Project planning techniques. Vienna, VA: Management Concepts.
Reich, B. (2007). Managing knowledge and learning in IT projects: A conceptual framework and guidelines for practice. Project Management Journal, 38(2), 5–17.
Reich, B., & Wee, S. (2006). Searching for knowledge in the PMBOK® Guide. Project Management Journal, 37(2), 11–25.
Ritchie, P. (2007). Project management knowledge management: Moving from standards to leadership. 2007 PMI Global Congress Proceedings, Hong Kong.
SAP International. (2007). Knowledge management maturity model. Internal Document.
Siegel, J. G., & Shim, J. K. (2005). Dictionary of accounting terms (4th ed.). Hauppauge, NY: Barron's Educational Series, Inc.
Terra, J. C., & Gordon, C. (2003). Realizing the promise of corporate portals: Leveraging knowledge for business success. Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann (Elsevier Science).
Wenger, E., & Snyder, W. (January-February 2000). Communities of practice: The organizational frontier. Harvard Business Review, 78(1), 139–145.
Wegner, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
© 2007, Ginger Levin and Parviz Rad
Originally published as a part of 2007 PMI Global Congress Proceedings – Atlanta, GA, USA
An essential tool for project planning, a work breakdown structure organizes a project’s total scope to help practitioners track projects across disciplines and project life cycles.