1. Why, in general, is knowledge sharing not a common
practice in the work place? Identify and discuss the obstacles that keep people
from sharing their professional (work) knowledge.
I believe that the primary reason for the lack of knowledge
sharing in the workplace is due to individuals not wanting to lose their
perceived competitive advantage and value to the firm. Most people identify
themselves as separate from the organization for which they work and fear that
the knowledge they bring to the company determines their relative value
compared to other employees. Since employees view their knowledge as the key
determining factor in their value to the firm, then it is logical that they
would be apprehensive in sharing this with co-workers. I think a common belief
is that once specific knowledge is shared with others in the organization, that
individual becomes dispensable since the knowledge is now “knowledge of the
entity”. This ties to the article since knowledge sharing benefits both parties
in the long-term. Just like the hesitant suppliers, individuals will ultimately
benefit from the knowledge obtained from co-workers, which increases their
value to not only their current employer, but to all employers.
2. In global supply chain management, how may knowledge
sharing create a win-win benefit for every entity involved?
As the article discussed, suppliers usually have more room
for improvement than do buyers. When I first saw the title of the article, my
first thought was that it would be adverse to a supplier to share knowledge
outside of basic data with a buyer. As I read the article though, I was surprised
to find that the suppliers were the ones who were actually benefiting more from
the increased collaboration. The reasons for this, as the authors pointed out,
were very logical from both the suppliers and buyers’ perspective. The buyer
benefits because they are better able to meet their customers’ demands due to
less downtime, higher quality products, and faster responsiveness to market
conditions. Suppliers benefit because they are able to increase their operating
efficiency by having more insight into customer demands, thus not producing
inventory they will not be able to sell to buyers.
3. The article suggests that the benefit resulting from
knowledge sharing may not be evenly divided among all participating parties.
Identify an example, other than what's given in the article, to illustrate this
situation. Discuss what can be done to effectively alleviate this situation.
I was not able to find an example of a specific company that
benefited more than the other did from knowledge sharing in the supply chain. I
did find a few articles that identified the benefits of both the supplier and
the buyer, but they did not identify which one received the greatest benefit
from the collaboration. One example I
found discussed how Chrysler collaborated with their suppliers in the 1980’s as
they were experiencing difficulties. This resulted in the creation of the SCORE
program (Supplier Cost Reduction ), which saved Chrysler billions of dollars.
The article stated that Chrysler only asked their suppliers to pass 50% of the
savings they received as a result of the program to Chrysler. All parties
benefited from this program, but I am not sure who benefited the most. Long-term
contracts and commitments are one way to help alleviate the situation where one
party feels they will not benefit from the steps involved in setting up a
collaborative relationship.
Source:
https://www.bcgperspectives.com/content/articles/sourcing_procurement_supply_chain_management_buyer_supplier_collaboration_roadmap_for_success/
bcg.perspectives by The Boston Consulting Group
“Buyer-Supplier
Collaboration : A Roadmap for Success”
August 21, 2013
By: Robert
Tevelson, Jonathan Zygelman, Paul Farrell, Stefan Benett, Peter Rosenfeld, and
Andreas Alsén
4. The article also contends that cultural difference does
not significantly hinder knowledge sharing across borders. What do you think?
Explain your opinion.
As the article states, “cross-cultural differences have
always mattered less in business-to-business relationships than they have in
business-to-consumer exchanges.” I believe this to be absolutely true,
especially when dealing with multinational corporations as the authors’ study
does. However, I do believe that cultural differences do have the potential to
hinder knowledge sharing between certain countries. There are certain places in
the world where the native culture has not had much exposure to cultural
influences from other groups, which could impact their willingness to share
knowledge. As a whole, I agree with the article that the worldwide cultural
integration that has taken place over the past 20 years and the expanding reach
of multinational corporations have made knowledge sharing across borders a
non-issue.
5. Discuss the role of IT, esp. Internet-enabled IT, in
global supply chain knowledge sharing.
I found a good article that focused specifically on how Web
2.0 technology has helped organizations, and discusses the integration of the
buyer-supplier relationship. Technology has had an impact on every aspect of
business since the introduction of the internet. I think knowledge sharing is
the most significant product of the internet, and as worldwide IT capabilities
increase, the knowledge sharing in the global supply chain will continue to influence
these intercompany relationships. The article I read highlighted how companies
are using Web platforms to manage their external relationships, including
suppliers. Internet-enabled IT can make the collaboration discussed in the “Sharing
Global Supply Chain Knowledge” article easier to achieve and at a lower cost.
Platforms such as this blog are one method discussed in the Web 2.0 article I
read that are being utilized by companies to facilitate knowledge sharing. The
internet has given suppliers real-time access to their customers (buyers)
information, which leads to better service and increased agility to meet
demands.
Source:
http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/business_technology/how_companies_are_benefiting_from_web_20_mckinsey_global_survey_results
Survey|McKinsey
Quarterly
“How
companies are benefiting from Web 2.0: McKinsey Global Survey results”
Nice post Paul. I'd like to comment on your response to the 3rd discussion point. I found the Chrysler example very interesting. While Chrysler and their suppliers benefited from the vast amount of money saved, Chrysler also received a pretty significant unmeasurable benefit: supplier loyalty. With a deal as sweet as keeping half the money saved, for a program the suppliers didn't contribute much capital for I'd say they will be sticking around the long haul.
ReplyDeleteI personally never considered this topic as it deals with the individuals within an organization. It seemed so easy to apply between two different organizations, but after reading the Caterpillar article it becomes almost familiar. I feel like there are possibly some parallels that may be drawn between your first point and the Caterpillar article.
ReplyDelete