Semens

Siemens

1. What are the difficulties associated with developing knowledge management networks? Why are such efforts hard to realize?

After reading about knowledge-based management more in depth, it seems everything about the implementation of them is difficult, not that they aren’t worth the added effort. KM networks are based around a tremendous amount of data and information pertaining to the organization and it’s employees. Because KM networks account for employees experience and knowledge, the systems become quite complex. The overall effect of the system may also be hard to quantify because it’s hard to precisely code experience base logic.

KM networks often have many unique functions to better facilitate communication within their staff, including messaging and emailing capabilities, all which make the system more difficult to implement. Not only is this an incredible amount of information to store, but it needs to be secure as well. All this information needs to be easily accessed through a common portal and also be easily added to so the network stays current, and valuable. KM networks are very expensive and need to be very dependable given their vast amount of daily responsibilities.

2. What has made ShareNet so successful? What are the biggest challenges it faces going forward? How should these be addressed?

In 2002, ShareNet had 19,000 subscribers, with 53 managers in countries around the world. The case noted that, “20,000 knowledge objects had been deposited into the system.” ShareNet has been so successful because it is a great product that is innovative and useful for thousands of clients. The success was also in large part due to the marketing campaign, including the incentives available to the users in which 300 of them in reach of an award/shares.

According to the case, and issue moving forward would be to decide whether to set ShareNet up as a single network connecting multiple businesses and functions, or to have a...