Natural England

Knowledge Management IN THE COUNTRYSIDE AGENCY AP02/18

FOR INFORMATION

The problem

1. We cannot easily explain the Agency's real successes without tangible and accurate case studies. 

2. The lessons we learn from our work on the ground are not always flowing through the organisation to help our policy formulation and targeting of resources. We need knowledge at our finger tips to speed up our decision making and help us respond quickly to change. That knowledge then has to be shared with the outside world and, in particular, we had to make sure it reached our partners as effectively as possible. 

3. Some of our systems have not always made it easy. Our software packages (eg. Lotus Smartsuite) are not compatible with external audiences. A lot of know-how and information available internally electronically is not accessible to our closest stakeholders or Board members. Our systems do not yet support remote collaborative working, though our teams are spread geographically across the Agency. And our library, with its broad range of information and high quality images, has been focused on the principle of 'collection' rather than 'connection', with its old-fashioned card catalogue, making it very difficult for staff, partners and the public to access. 

What did we decide to do about it?

4. These issues are not unique to the Countryside Agency. Better Knowledge Management is the approach to tackling this. 

Knowledge Management is defined as:

• "...a broad collection of organisational practices and approaches related to generating, capturing, and disseminating know-how and other content relevant to the organisation's business. [It is] 20% technical and 80% cultural." (World Bank) 

5. In January 2001, we defined a vision for the Countryside Agency:

"We can find out what we want when we need it, by... 

• - knowing what we know
• - sharing what we know
• - knowing where to find out what we don't know." 

6. Drawing from best practice in Australia, the US, and in corporate life, we also identified the concept of Learning Networks as a potential solution to the problems of targeting information, joining up organisations and learning remotely. For our purposes we have defined Learning Networks as 'communities working towards a common goal, enabled (when appropriate) by technology, moderated by a facilitator to share knowledge and information'. In general, these are only made available to invited organisations and individuals, to allow trust to develop between the various members and to enable effective facilitation.

7. In February 2001, we appointed consultants (SparkNow and Simulacra Media) to develop a Knowledge Management Strategy and test the feasibility of Learning Networks and guide us in their development.

KM Strategy Summary

8. The Knowledge Management Strategy provided us with an in-depth analysis of our strengths in Knowledge Management and some of the challenges we faced. The strategy provided us with a framework, and prioritised activities, to allow us to 'achieve a better understanding of the information we already have available internally, an improved system of searching and accessing information, and a culture which promotes knowledge sharing and encourages personal responsibility for keeping colleagues informed, so that we can be even more effective'.

9. The framework split activity into 4 strands:

• Promote capture of knowledge;  

• ü e.g. imbedding KM into existing systems such as project appraisal process and finance systems, and rewarding staff for effective Knowledge Management. 

• Ensure knowledge flows effectively;  

• ü e.g. training, and through greater and more effective use of mechanisms to share best practice. 

• Apply knowledge effectively;  

• ü e.g. sharing what work wells elsewhere, and develop protocols for corporate activities. 

• Invest in resources needed;
• e.g. invest in the ICT infrastructure, and ensure that the staff have the right skills.  

Cultural/behavioural Issues

10. Experienced practitioners often say the biggest blockage to successful implementation of Knowledge Management is the cultural change required. Our consultants acknowledged that we too had a major hurdle to overcome, but in comparison to many other organisations embarking on such change, we were well-placed because of our respect for good practice, our relatively small size and our willingness and proven ability to innovate. They found:

What have we done already?

11. Our work can be summarised as follows:

• We have made sure a central plank of our IT strategy is about improving the use of technology to help deliver a Knowledge Management approach. Our overall aim is an 'integrated architecture with a single point of entry to all information'.
• We have worked with IBM to develop a proposal for a new Human Resources system ('Signpost') which helps staff identify lead officers on specific projects and with specific knowledge. This will be launched in the Autumn;
• Public Affairs Branch is working with KM & ICT Branch to deliver a new corporate website (to be launched in Winter 2002/03), which will increase the quality, timeliness, and relevance of information provided to specified users. Ultimately this will integrate with our internal IT systems;
• We have developed the new Resource Centre in John Dower House which aims to give people (especially visiting staff) a comfortable new environment for accessing information, holding informal meetings, hotdesking and docking laptops;
• We are about to launch (June 2002) a new electronic Library System - 'Rural e-source'- which will deliver library services, including publications, research, books and images, electronically to all staff. This will significantly increase the value of the information we have;
• A best practice database has been developed and launched for Vital Villages programme grants. A further one on Land Management is currently being built, and we intend to set up another, capturing all planned and current research, by Winter 2002/03;
• We have delivered 4 pilot Learning Networks;
• Rural Task Force LN
• Rural Affairs Forum for England LN
• Market Towns LN
• Equipping Rural Communities LN
• and we are on target to launch a further 12 in June/July 2002 (Annex)  

What is still to be done?

12. In addition to the tasks outlined above, we still have a lot to do, including:

• Continued implementation of the ICT Strategy over the next 4 years, including the development of an Enterprise Information Portal - the single entry point through which information can be accessed by our staff and, in some cases, external audiences, the introduction of electronic document and records management (EDRM) and the rollout of new compatible software;
• Recognition amongst all staff that Knowledge Management should be a standard working practice;
• Further development of best practice databases;
• Training to make sure staff have the right skills and techniques for knowledge sharing and recognition for this through the appraisal/reward systems;
• Consolidation of the benefits of Learning Networks.

  (NB. Board members are able to be members of Learning Networks if they wish. At present, it is not possible to access our internal systems. If we go ahead with the implementation of a new firewall as planned in the IT strategy, we will be able to provide Board members access from their own machines to our library systems and new staff knowledge/contact database.)

  What have the benefits been?

  13. We have identified the following benefits: 

• The Agency is widely recognised as being innovative and a lead player in implementation of KM within public sector - we are making new links to a wider range of organisations useful to our business;
• The Rural Task Force Learning Network has extended our influence, leading to the Agency being recognised as having a major role to play as facilitator in finding solutions rapidly for the countryside post-Foot and Mouth Disease;
• The Market Towns LN has allowed us to maintain contact and work with a large number of implementors to expand the programme rapidly and support effective delivery;
• The Equipping Rural Communities LN produced a widely-supported response within 6 weeks to a government consultation, which is proving to be influential.
• We have moved some areas of 'blockage' and frustration by making links - e.g. some regions have recognised the value of identifying projects by area so that links across programmes can be made.
• Many branches have recognised their role in supporting other branches and the impact they have on the whole organisation and have produced 'Terms of Reference' and 'Service Level Agreements'. 

  What lessons have we learnt?

  14. We have learned the following lessons: 

• Cultural and behavioural change is tough and takes a long time  

• Ÿ Sharing knowledge reduces risk, duplication and wasted effort
• Ÿ It supports improvements in effectiveness and delivers better value for money 
• Ÿ We are a best practice organisation in Knowledge Management, and have high credibility in this area across Government. 

Risk

15. We are spending a lot, with no guarantee that we will able to demonstrate better influencing as a result. 

Annex 1

LEARNING NETWORKS

Table of Potential Learning Networks

Learning Networks Resources

• All financial and staff resource implications are planned and accounted for within existing corporate plan:
• Each of the first 15 Learning Networks will cost around £10k per network per year - this cost diminishes substantially after the first 15.
• We recommend that each Learning Network has up to 30% of a Full Time Equivalent (FTE) to facilitate it in the early stages. This is mostly about changing the way people work rather than new work. For example, using the Learning Networks for discussions and document sharing rather than by email/post and organising as many meetings and conferences.
• We have identified £100,000 over 5 years for evaluation and monitoring of the Learning Networks and the contractors.