organization network analysis:a tool for building a learning organization

Knowledge and Process Management Volume 6 Number 1 pp 53–60 (1999)

" Research Article

Organization Network Analysis:A Tool for Building a Learning Organization

Faren Foster1* and Gerry Falkowski2

1IBM Enterprise Web Management, USA2IBM Consulting Group, USA

An essential knowledge management element is an organization’s network for sharing information. This articledescribes Organization Network Analysis, a tool that enables companies to map the information exchangesamong employees and determine how to identify and leverage knowledge brokers and boundary spanners, andto integrate cliques, bottlenecks and isolated groups. Copyright ? 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd andCornwallis Emmanuel Ltd.

INTRODUCTION

Joe Allen, director of a major computer company’s printerdivision, had a significant problem—his employees didn’tseem to interact to exchange knowledge effectively. Whenone department generated a successful solution to a com-mon problem, it wasn’t shared with other departmentsfacing the same challenge. Adding new countries to globaloperations resulted in the same set of frustrations each time,because there was no exchanging of ‘lessons learned’ withother startup countries. Managers seemed to make decisionsunilaterally, and did not use the intellectual resources oftheir employees for input to the decision-making process.

Joe knew instinctively that this problem existed and wasnegatively impacting his division’s bottom-line results.However, he had only anecdotal evidence to describe thedifficulties and was uncertain about how to improve thesituation. Joe needed a practical tool to help solve this‘fuzzy’ problem.

CCC 1092-4604/99/010053-08$17.50Copyright ? 1999 John Wiley & Sons Ltd and Cornwallis Em

One of the major challenges faced by executives today isensuring that knowledge is shared effectively throughouttheir organizations. The traditional organization chart mayshow who reports to whom, but often who talks to whomis more important in getting work done and generating newideas. Informal networks of friends and colleagues gatheringin the cafeteria, after work or on the Internet are anincreasingly important part of knowledge exchange in anorganization. These informal communication networks maybe invisible to the organization, which makes it hard formanagement to recognize and leverage the expertise theycontain. Working with, not against, these informal com-munities and the relationships which constitute them is thekey to building a learning organization.

There are numerous articles, conferences, websites andbooks about the importance of knowledge management andlearning organizations. However, most of these sources aretoo theoretical for managers to turn to for practical help. Itis difficult to find tangible tools which allow managers topinpoint problems with their organizational knowledgesharing and to aid in developing solutions.

Organization Network Analysis (ONA) is a tool whichcan provide this practical help to diagnose and solveorganizational knowledge-sharing problems. ONA involvesgathering data about who talks to whom for differentpurposes in the organization. This information is thentransformed into clear diagrams of a group’s communicationactivities for sharing knowledge and information. Viewingand interpreting these diagrams enables a group to identifypatterns. Emerging networks, isolated people and organiz-ations, and ‘boundary spanners’—people who share

Faren Foster is a Program Manager in IBM’s Enterprise Web Managementorganization. She focuses on implementing knowledge management anddistant learning projects within IBM.

Gerry Falkowski is an executive consultant in the IBM Consulting Group.Gerry’s in-depth knowledge is the result of over 29 years of combinedexperience in general line management and organizational consulting. Hehas worked in areas such as field operations, manufacturing, development,human resources, and corporate headquarters.

*Correspondence to: Faren Foster, Program Manager, e-Care forEmployees, Enterprise Web Management, T/L 351-3537, outside # (914)288-3537, 44 South Broadway, Office 4E22, White Plains, NY 10601,USA. E-mail: [email protected]

manuel Ltd.

Knowledge and Process ManagementRESEARCH ARTICLE

Figure 1 ONA diagram for a 20-employee organization

knowledge with widespread contacts outside their immedi-ate departments—can be spotted. If dysfunctional patternsappear, quick and effective interventions can take placewhich will rapidly improve the knowledge sharing.

If a team is having trouble working together and com-municating, which results in real performance problems,ONA will give very specific facts about the dysfunctionalnature of the team. Based on classic consulting, it is apredictable phenomenon that senior executives generally donot team well in times of major problem or major change,especially if the environments they have been used to weremore ‘silo’ oriented. However, the reasons for this are notalways obvious—in fact, they tend to be hidden. ONA canbe used to get at the core of problems quickly by revealingthe root causes of the problems. It provides the ‘rock solid’facts to use in providing quick and orderly interventionsto bring about the desired changes in behavior necessary toresolve dysfunctional teaming.

What do ONA diagrams look like? Figure 1 is an exampleof a diagram for a 20-employee organization. Each noderepresents a person in the organization, and each squarecontaining those notes represents a department. The solidlines between the nodes show confirmed high two-waycommunication between people. In other words, in theDesign Center, the line between Lee and Gardner indicatesthat Lee says he talks to Gardner and Gardner says he talksto Lee. Dotted line portions denote one-way communicationto an external entity such as a trade association.

54

CONDUCTING AN ORGANIZATIONNETWORK ANALYSIS

Depending upon the size of the work group to be analyzed,an Organization Network Analysis can be completed in atimeframe ranging from one week to one month. Projectsare typically completed in four main phases—scopedefinition, data gathering, data analysis and datainterpretation.

Phase 1: Scope Definition

In this phase, the ONA consultant and the client represent-ing the organization decide which work groups and peopleshould be included in the analysis. This important step isoften like walking a tightrope. If too many people areincluded in the analysis, data gathering becomes verycumbersome and time consuming. The amount of follow-upand analysis increases exponentially with the number ofparticipants. However, if critical people or departments areleft out of the analysis, an incomplete picture of communi-cations will result. Typically ONA studies involve from 10to 60 people. In order to examine contacts with externalentities such as academia, consultants, conferences andwebsites, external nodes can also be included in the study inaddition to the 10–60 people.

Choosing who will participate can be a sensitive topic.During a recent ONA, we agreed with the client that

F. Foster and G. Falkowski

RESEARCH ARTICLEKnowledge and Process Management

several staff people reporting to the vice-president wouldnot be included in the study since we were already going tobe surveying almost 60 people. One of the staff peopleheard about the project and was upset that he wasn’tincluded. He interpreted his exclusion to mean that theconsultants didn’t consider him to be an important part ofthe communications network. Actually, in excluding thestaff people we were simply trying to prune the scopeof the project to a manageable number of participants.Because of this sensitivity, it is recommended that at the

Organization Network Analysis

beginning of the project the consultants and the clientleader explain the study and its purpose to the organization,and the reasoning behind who will and who won’t beparticipating.

Phase 2: Data Gathering

A survey is administered to all participants in the study,either in a group survey session or individually. Below is anexample of a survey input sheet.

55


Each participant in the survey is listed on the left-handside of the survey sheet. When the survey is administered,the participant is asked to rate the frequency of his or herinteractions (high, medium or low) with the other people onthe survey list. Typically these ratings are gathered for thefollowing three questions:

Question 1: Getting the job done—With whom do youinteract to complete the tasks and responsi-bilities you are assigned?

Question 2: Decision making—With whom do you inter-act to seek input, suggestions or feedbackbefore making a decision?

Question 3: New Ideas—With whom do you interact todiscuss innovative thoughts and ideas?

The questions can be tailored to meet the needs of theorganization. For example, questions such as ‘With whom doyou work to develop the business strategy?’ and ‘Withwhom do you work to understand customer wants andneeds’ have been used based upon special client situations.For understanding how well the knowledge managementsystem is working in an organization, we would use ques-tions such as ‘To whom do you supply knowledge andinformation?’ ‘From which sources do you get knowledgeand information necessary to do your job?’ and ‘With whichsources do you collaborate to create new knowledge?’

Because confirmed two-way communication is the basisof the analysis, it is very important that all surveys becompleted. Holding a group survey session is one way ofensuring this, but it can be difficult, particularly for largeprojects, to gather the people in one place at one time. Onealternative is to give a hard-copy survey to each personindividually to complete and return. Another choice whichhas proven to be very successful in past projects is to sendthe survey out electronically, via e-mail or Lotus Notes, andhave the participants complete and return it online. Oneclient gave out two movie tickets to people who returnedthe first 20 surveys. This turned out to be a greatmotivation technique to get the surveys returned.

Phase 3: Data Analysis

The survey data is then entered into a software programcalled InFlow=. InFlow, a PC-based software application,was developed and licensed to IBM in 1995 by ValdisKrebs. It maps the conversations, work, and informationexchange in an organization and draws simple, yetinformation-rich, diagrams. The consultant can then set upvarious scenarios using the diagrams and measurementreports to look at the organization from many angles, suchas examining communications in a knowledge-based processto understanding the diversity issues in an organization.

Phase 4: Data Interpretation

Based on the ONA report output, the consultant performsan initial interpretation of the InFlow diagrams and

56

measurements and summarizes preliminary findings. At thatpoint an interactive session is held with the client to sharethe results, gain insights, and perform further analysis.These sessions are where most of the ‘ah-has’ happen.Clients are usually very excited as they discover aspects oftheir organization that were previously hidden.

Following the data interpretation, prescriptive interven-tions and ways to leverage hidden knowledge-sharinggroups can be formulated. After the first ONA, regularcheckups (follow-on ONAs) are recommended to revealhow the organization is adapting to previous interventionsand to changes in the environment. These follow-on studiesserve the same purpose as a periodic physical examinationat the doctor’s office.

ONA DIAGRAM EXAMPLES—THE GOOD,THE BAD AND THE UGLY

The ONA diagram of a healthy organization will have acomplex ‘web’ of confirmed two-way communications lines.Figure 2 is an example of a good ONA diagram for a50-person organization. Most, of the employees haveseveral confirmed two-way communications, often acrossdepartment boundaries. Only a couple of employees are notconnected. Note that the external nodes on the top leftare not connected via solid two-way communicationlines—they will be used for another form of analysis to bediscussed later.

Figure 3 is an example of an ONA diagram for a37-person organization which shows a high need forimprovement. Note the large proportion of people with noconfirmed high or medium two-way communication withtheir co-workers. Furthermore, entire departments, suchas human resources, are isolated from the rest of theorganization.

ORGANIZATION NETWORK ANALYSIS TOOLS

In addition to diagramming the communication network ofthe organization, ONA provides several tools to assist inanalyzing various aspects of knowledge sharing.

Identifying the Boundary Spanners

ONA provides a measure called ‘reach’ which can helpidentify boundary spanners, or those people that havenumerous cross-organization communication ties. The reachmeasure, which has a value of zero (low) to one (high),reflects how many diverse two-way contacts a person has. Itis a good measure of a person’s visibility and knowledge-sharing within the organization. The InFlow softwareproduces a list which rates the top ten people in theorganization having the highest reach for each question areaof the survey—getting the job done, making decisions and



Figure 2 ONA diagram for a 50-person organization

Figure 3 ONA diagram for a 37-person organization

generating new ideas. In addition, an organization’s reach asan entity can be calculated to measure the richness of itscommunications network.

In Figure 4, an unheralded, non-management employee(circled) turned out to have the highest reach in the organiz-


ation. Tom emerged as a key information resource whosecontact with other departments and locations were richerthan his manager’s. Our recommendation was to leveragethe quality and quantity of Tom’s contacts by putting him inroles such as leading cross-functional task forces.

57


5

Figure 4 Measuring the ‘reach’ of employees

Figure 5 A client organization with an E/I ratio of "0.61

Analyzing External versus Internal Connections

To find out how well a company is learning from externalcontacts such as customers, business partners, professionalassociations and academia, the InFlow software can generatean E/I (external/internal) ratio. This E/I ratio can range from"1, which denotes a group which is very internallyoriented, to +1, which shows that the organization is open

8

to and continually learning from its environment. In general,any positive number for the E/I ratio is a good result.

Figure 5 shows a client organization which had an E/Iratio of "0.61. This negative E/I ratio indicated thatthe group was very internally oriented. In the executivesteering committee meeting where these results were pre-sented, an executive exclaimed that this measure was a‘blinding glimpse of the obvious’. Recommendations were



Figure 6 A marketing unit with an E/I ratio of 0.29

implemented to get the company reconnected with theoutside world.

In contrast, Figure 6 is an example of a marketing unitthat had an E/I ratio of 0.29, which indicates that theorganization is open to its environment.

The Myth of the Chief Strategist

Isolated individuals, many of whom are unaware of their‘disconnectedness’, can also be identified using ONA. Inone case, an employee who was well placed in the hierarchyof an organization considered himself to be the ‘chiefstrategist’. Unfortunately, he was quite mistaken about hisreal role. When an ONA diagram was developed for thequestion ‘with whom do you work to develop the businessstrategy?’ no one chose him as a key interaction or a sourceof information. The ‘Chief Strategist’ was actually isolatedfrom the flow of how strategies were really generated. Thisillustrates that a prominent position in the hierarchy doesnot guarantee a good location in the flow of work, ideas andexpertise.

Our intervention technique was to use the ONA diagramand have a one-on-one discussion with the Chief Strategist.During the session, the Chief Strategist tried to rationalizeand deny the results shown in the chart. In a situationlike this, the best approach for the consultant is to allowthe individual to go through the stages of denial, and thenbring him back into a discussion of the reality reflected bythe chart. We then talked to him about ways to make


improvements in his communication style, which had madepeople perceive him as arrogant. We tested the communi-cation network six months later and saw a significantimprovement in his networking patters (Figure 7).

Identifying Potential Communities of Practice

In our exploration for change agents, we came upon apattern in a client’s organization which resembled a‘Bermuda Triangle’. Three employees in different depart-ments communicated among themselves, but not to the restof the organization. It appeared that key information wasbeing shared within the Triangle, but could not escape toothers who needed it. When the employees were inter-viewed, it became clear that they were communicatingabout innovative ideas for improved corporate Internetsites. Their ‘Bermuda Triangle’ became the basis for a largerwebsite community of practice which ended up benefitingthe whole corporation.

SUMMARY

Organization Network Analysis has proven to be one of themost useful and practical tools to enhance knowledgesharing and communications within organizations. By pro-viding factual data and diagrams about communicationspatterns, it can help objectify and take some of the emotionout of solving sensitive, people-oriented problems. One

59


6

Figure 7 Improvement in the Chief Strategist’s networking patterns

client executive declares ‘so much of consulting output datacan be contested—this is rock solid’. Another client states‘it gets at the heart and pulse of an organization faster thanany diagnostic tool I know!’ As effective knowledge man-

0

agement becomes recognized as generating significant stra-tegic advantage, Organization Network Analysis will proveto be a technique of great value to companies in helpingthem harness and unleash the full potential of their people.


organization network analysis:a tool for building a learning organization

Documents