Created in 2000 to present to the CEO and CIO of Compaq

1. Knowledge Management
Strategy

2. 2
MissionMission
 Examine the benefit of a corporate KM strategyExamine the benefit of a corporate KM strategy
for Compaqfor Compaq
 Evaluate Compaq’s current initiativesEvaluate Compaq’s current initiatives
 Propose a strategy and roadmapPropose a strategy and roadmap

3. 3
AgendaAgenda
 What is Knowledge Management
 Current state of Knowledge Management in Compaq
 Knowledge Management Strategy proposal

4. 4
It’s All About Delivering KnowledgeIt’s All About Delivering Knowledge
for Effective Decision Makingfor Effective Decision Making
Data
Store
Computing
&
Communication
KnowledgeKnowledge
&&
DecisionDecision
MakingMaking

5. 5
What is Knowledge Management?What is Knowledge Management?
PeoplePeople
 Knowledge managersKnowledge managers
 Formal Communities of PracticeFormal Communities of Practice
 Training and communicationsTraining and communications
 Measurement and reward systemsMeasurement and reward systems
 Knowledge sharing cultureKnowledge sharing culture
TechnologyTechnology
 CollaborationCollaboration
 Workflow & project managementWorkflow & project management
 RepositoriesRepositories
 Content managementContent management
 LearningLearning
 PortalsPortals
 Search engines & locatorsSearch engines & locators
 Document managementDocument management
 Problem resolution systemsProblem resolution systems
ProcessProcess
 Forming Communities of PracticeForming Communities of Practice
 Collaboration processCollaboration process
 Shared standardsShared standards
 Common taxonomyCommon taxonomy
 Survey, census, requirements analysisSurvey, census, requirements analysis
 Metrics and reportingMetrics and reporting
 Cross-organizational integrationCross-organizational integration
 Feedback loopFeedback loop

6. 6
Benefits of Best-in-Class KMBenefits of Best-in-Class KM
 Eliminate redundant efforts
 Avoid making the same mistakes twice
 Collaborate across businesses to stimulate innovation
 Be perceived as a “smart partner” by customers
 Reuse materials, expertise and problem solving experience to
benefit partners and customers
 Find needed information quickly and easily
 Receive personalized information at the right time
 Locate and leverage expertise and experience
 Learn effectively at the time of need

7. 7
What are KM Leaders Doing?What are KM Leaders Doing?
Organization
Target
Value Proposition Approach Technology Results
Chevron Reduce operating
costs
Communities of
Practice (COPs),
facilitate transfer
of Best Practices
Standardized
Microsoft
platform,
Plumtree portal
$2 billion
reduction in
annual operating
costs
(1991 vs. 1998)
Cap Gemini
Ernst & Young
Faster revenue
growth, lower
costs
COPs, central KM
managers,
content
management
Microsoft
platform and
Exchange
10-fold increase in
revenue with
5-fold increase in
employees
Increased
production from
1500 to 6000
bbl/day for
customer
Schlumberger Knowledge in the
hands of
employees and
customers
Technical COPs,
intranet &
extranet
Web enabled
Source: APQC, 2000

8. 8
What are Competitors Doing?What are Competitors Doing?
Results
Reduced service
request time,
increased sales
productivity
Organization
Target
Value Proposition Approach Technology
Dell Decrease
customer
response time,
lower costs
COPs, universal
repository
Standardized on
Exchange Server
and Outlook
IBM Global
Services
Revenue growth,
industry
leadership
COPs, knowledge
managers,
Intellectual
Capital
Management
System
Lotus Notes,
Raven, Domino
400% increase in
service revenue,
time savings of
$24M in 1997
HP Revenue growth,
customer demand
Focused on
people and
process solutions
70+ COPs speed
adoption of
consulting
approaches
COPs, knowledge
maps
Source: APQC, 2000

9. 9
KM Journey: Best Practice vs. ROIKM Journey: Best Practice vs. ROI
KMPhasesofBestPracticeKMPhasesofBestPractice
ROIROI
NO ACTIVITYNO ACTIVITY
EXPLORE and EXPERIMENTEXPLORE and EXPERIMENT
LAUNCH PILOTS and KM INITIATIVESLAUNCH PILOTS and KM INITIATIVES
EXPANDEXPAND
INSTITUTIONALIZEINSTITUTIONALIZE
Some Compaq initiatives are
higher up the scale, but none are
enterprise-wide
Globally, CompaqGlobally, Compaq
is here…is here…
Source: APQC, 2000

10. 10
AgendaAgenda
 What is Knowledge Management
 Current state of Knowledge Management in Compaq
 Knowledge Management Strategy proposal

11. 11
Compaq Internal KM AnalysisCompaq Internal KM Analysis
 Conducted an internal analysis
– Engaged KM experts to assess current state
– Conducted KM summits
 Collected data
– Received 466 responses to KM survey
– Conducted KM interviews
 Found positive indications
– Many excellent initiatives
– People, process and technology expertise on board

12. 12
Barriers to KM SuccessBarriers to KM Success
 Too many systems to deal with
 Information overload
 Not enough time to keep up or make sense
 Can’t find needed information or the right person
 Can’t always access information
 No payoff for sharing knowledge
 Don’t know what’s available or how to use tools
 Redundant, fragmented efforts

13. 13
Examples of current problemsExamples of current problems
There is no good way to
find a subject matter
expert.
Limited information exchange
between engineering,
manufacturing, services,
suppliers.
Sales reps can’t get
information they need
when they need it.
 Sales cycle prolonged
 Best solution is not always
offered
Implications
 Ineffective design reuse
 Product launch mistakes
repeated
 Lost opportunities
 Lost time
 Right resources are not applied
to the problem
No common processes
for information sharing
between employees,
partners, and customers
Too many different
systems and
information sources
No Compaq standard
expertise locator or
people finder
ProblemSituation

14. Current KM Tools by Category
Affinity groups
AltaVista forums
Notes Conferences
COPs
eRoom
Forums
Lotus Notes
WebBoard
Email
Distribution lists
File shares
Exchange public folders
Account lists
Collaboration
Primavera TeamPlay
SCORPIO
Bid Solution Crafting Tool
THINQ (internal best practices)
Visual Process (methodology knowledge-base)
Business Excellence Assessment
Expeditor
PSIA
IcomXpress Keyflow
Infomall (software development)
CPT (Capacity Planning Tool)
Workflow & Project Management

15. Current KM Tools by Category
Content ManagementContent Management
Inline
Readers Choice
Web Library
WebIR
PS Knowledge Network
Solutions Center Knowledge Network
Organization specific pages
Regional specific pages
Intranet Infoboards
RepositoriesRepositories
WWCIW
WWCIW (HR)
GARR (Global Accounts Revenue Reporting)
NCRF (customer validation)
TechInfo (product information)
TIM (Total Information Manager)
TIPS (NonStop Himalaya Inline)
Tandem-based Data Warehouse
Asia Customer Reference Application
(ACRA)
Bespoke (documentation repository)
Local servers
Sniff (StorageWorks website)
Horizon OnLine Catalogue
Learning Utility
Educational CDs
Virtual Presenter
CBTs and Training
LearningLearning

16. KM Tools by Category
Planets
MyPIM
SE Connection
ActiveAnswers
Ask Compaq
MS Compaq Alliance
Enterprise Portfolio Repository
Compaq Customer Success
Program
Global Account Management
PortalsPortals Search Engines & LocatorsSearch Engines & Locators
Verity
Comet – Services Tool
Compaq White Pages
ASIS (skills inventory)
Novient
Document ManagementDocument Management
Documentum
Tandem Document Management Facility
Knowledge Navigator
File Shares
Exchange Public Folders

17. Current KM Tools by CategoryCurrent KM Tools by Category
Other
TMS
US HR Service Center (Authoria)
Local warehouse for reporting via Portal
Manual Profitability Tool
QA (homegrown application)
IS Information Tracking System
PIT tracking system
Prophecy
Status Board
Security Warning
Quest (Call Tracking)
Cornerstone
RightNow (Partner email, self help)
Central 800 Number
Etracking
Knowledge Tree
Supplier Review
Subcontract Supplier Information
Integrated Problem Tracking (IPT)
Product Service Reporting
ServiceWare
Motive
CSNet
IQ2000
Remedy (Help Desk Tool)
QTip
Brightware
Primus
Knowledge Navigator
IM Offline / Bookshelf
Quick Find
KCS
TIMA
Ask Compaq
Problem Resolution

18. 18
Problem SummaryProblem Summary
PeoplePeople
 No corporate wide CommunitiesNo corporate wide Communities
of Practiceof Practice
 No effective way to find expertsNo effective way to find experts
 Difficult to reward knowledge sharingDifficult to reward knowledge sharing
TechnologyTechnology
 Explosion of tools but no convergenceExplosion of tools but no convergence
 Lack of integration between toolsLack of integration between tools
 Lack of integration between informationLack of integration between information
sourcessources
 Tools not delivering on full productivityTools not delivering on full productivity
potentialpotential
ProcessProcess
 No common process for knowledgeNo common process for knowledge
sharingsharing
 No common process for collectingNo common process for collecting
knowledge requirementsknowledge requirements
 No common process for measuring andNo common process for measuring and
reporting KM ROIreporting KM ROI

19. 19
AgendaAgenda
 What is Knowledge Management
 Current state of Knowledge Management in Compaq
 Knowledge Management Strategy proposal

20. 20
Recommended SolutionRecommended Solution
3. Leverage our existing strengths
4. Build common structure from our best initiatives
5. Create a Compaq Knowledge Management Program
11 22 33

21. 21
Leverage Existing StrengthsLeverage Existing Strengths
KM program processes
Intranet management approach
Organization Existing Initiative Strength to Leverage
Consumer
Satisfaction &
Quality Toolbox
Professional
Services
Customer
Services
WWSS
Consumer
Group
Knowledge
Network
ISSG
Knowledge
Centered Support
Web Library
HR Service Center
Product
Information Tool
ActiveAnswers
HRO&E
SPG
Call Center KM
Employee self-service process
Product launch process
Customer access to Compaq knowledge
Customer self-service process
Integration of external content
Collaboration processes and tools
11 22 33

22. 22
Build Common Structure fromBuild Common Structure from
Best InitiativesBest Initiatives
ISSG
Christina Hanger
Customer
Services
Peter Mercury
Professional
Services
Jeff Lynn
Engineering
Don Borgal
TargetsKM Leaders Common Structures
Marketing
David Merrill
Gary Elliott
 Collaboration models
 Systems integration standards
 Collaboration models
 Systems integration standards
 Collaboration models
 Internal content management
 Portal standards
 Remote access/synchronization
 Collaboration models
 Internal content management
 Portal standards
 Collaboration models
 Systems integration standards
 Add 2 points to
bottom line
 Increased customer
satisfaction
 Shorter time to problem
resolution
 Improved product and
services quality
 Increased sales, profits,
productivity, customer
satisfaction, employee
satisfaction
 Save $200M per year
 Save $millions
11 22 33

23. 23
Create Compaq KM ProgramCreate Compaq KM Program
Deliverables
– People
 Provide knowledge resource assistance
 Facilitate organizational learning and market KM successes
– Process
 Establish common KM requirements, standards and metrics
 Support collaboration
– Technology
 Support knowledge access
 Recommend a common set of tools for each KM category
11 22 33

24. 24
Cool Stuff from KM ProgramCool Stuff from KM Program
People
 Establish Communities of Practice for:
 Engineering, Manufacturing, Services and Suppliers
 Marketing professionals
 Professional Services and Customer Services
 All KM COP leaders
 Develop a KM training module for new employee orientation and other
training programs
Process
 Conduct a survey to collect KM user needs and requirements
 Develop, publish and maintain KM standards for:
 Collaboration
 Portal implementation
 Measuring and reporting
Technology
 Support standard collaboration tools
 Support common portal for personalization
 Support an expertise locator

25. 25
How Do We Deliver?How Do We Deliver?
 Establish a KM Steering Committee
– Cross-Compaq group representing GBUs, Geos and Functions
– Forum for surfacing, addressing and solving shared KM issues and
needs
– Bridge existing “silos”
– Leverage the work that is best done once
– Facilitate cross-organizational flow of know-how and best practices
 Establish a KM Program Office
– Coordinate KM Steering Committee
– Responsible for KM program deliverables
– Requirements
 12 FTEs
 $5M budget

26. 26
Immediate Next StepsImmediate Next Steps
 Approve KM Program………………..November 13th
 Establish KM Program Office……………….Q4 2000
 Announce KM Program ……………………..Q1 2001
 Convene KM Steering Committee …………Q1 2001

28. Backup Slides

29. 29
Compaq Knowledge Management RoadmapCompaq Knowledge Management Roadmap
Q3 ‘00 Q4 ‘00 Q1 ‘01 Q2 ‘01 Q3 ‘01 Q4 ‘01
Develop a Compaq
Global KM Strategy
Jan - Prioritize and Staggered Launch Pilot Initiatives
Nov 14th -
Formalize and Establish the Compaq KM Program
• Staff KM Program Office
• Identify resources and launch KM Steering Committee
• Establish Program goals, objectives, strategies & methods
Jan - KM Communications & Training Initiatives
• Create KM Communication/Training Task Force
• Establish links with existing training organizations
• Launch KM Communication program to educate/socialize GBUs/GEOs/Functions
Jan - Information Sources Integration
Initiatives
• Create Information Sources Integration Task Force
• Identify information sources to integrate
• Initiate Web Library Information integration
Mar - Establish KM Logical & Technical
Foundation
• Facilitate creation and adoption of common standards, processes,
methodologies
•Facilitate creation and adoption of standard platform, common
portal, common language and consistent user interface

30. 30
KM Program DeliverablesKM Program Deliverables
Common KM Requirements, Standards & Metrics
 Survey to determine user needs and requirements
 Communicate user needs and requirements to implementers
 Conduct usability testing and promote usability to implementers
 Document KM processes including measurement and reporting
 Develop, publish, and maintain KM standards
 Facilitate the development, publishing, and maintenance of an effective taxonomy
 Help implementers use taxonomy and standards in practical applications
Collaboration Support
 Provide standard collaboration processes and tools
 Facilitate creating, developing, expanding, and operating COPs
 Lead a community of the leaders of all COPs
 Recognize and reward those who lead and participate in COPs
 Provide a common list of all COPs and discussion forums to allow users to find those of
interest
Knowledge Access Support
 Recommend a common set of tools for each KM category
 Define user requirements and standards for portals and personalization
 Help implementers develop personalized portal interfaces
 Help users to customize and optimize personalized portals
 Help develop improved methods for remote access, including content synchronization and
wireless access
 Help develop rapid prototypes for accessing information, connecting disparate systems, and
proving concepts

31. 31
KM Program Deliverables (continued)KM Program Deliverables (continued)
Organizational Learning
 Develop and deliver a KM training module to integrate with Compaq new hire
orientation to ensure employees know about and can use KM processes and
tools
 Provide online self-help and self-paced instruction on using KM methods,
processes, and tools
 Conduct periodic workshops to facilitate sharing of best practices,
communication of new ideas, and adopting new ideas
 Communicate, promote, and educate on the KM Program both within and outside
Compaq
Knowledge Resource Assistance
 Help users find information, find people, and answer questions
 Develop and maintain directories, expertise locators, yellow pages, and contact
lists
 Provide feedback on user problems to improve existing processes and tools

32. 32
Case: ChevronCase: Chevron
 Target: Reduce operating costs
 Approach: Communities of Practice (COPs) and
facilitated transfer of best practices
 Technology: Standardized the whole company on a
common Microsoft platform, with Plumtree portal
 Results:
– $2 billion reduction in overall operating costs.
– Energy costs reduced by about $200 million per year.
– 10-15 percent improvement in capital efficiency.
– Barrels of oil output per employee increased by over
30 percent.
– Employee safety performance increased by more than
50 percent.
Source: APQC, 2000

33. 33
Case: Cap Gemini Ernst & YoungCase: Cap Gemini Ernst & Young
 Target: Faster revenue growth, lower cost
 Approach: Content management, COPs by practice,
industry and geography, central KM managers,
– Core team of knowledge managers provides
coordination and content management support - 650
people
– Spent $10,000 per employees to move to standard
platform and create KM processes. Continuing costs:
$1,000 per employee.
 Technology: Microsoft Platform and Exchange
 Results
– 10-fold increase in revenue with only a 5-fold increase
in headcount
Source: APQC, 2000

34. 34
Case:Case: IBM Global ServicesIBM Global Services
 Target: Revenue growth, industry leadership
 Approach: COPs, knowledge managers, central
repository and content management(ICM AssetWeb)
 Technology: Lotus Notes, Raven, Domino
 Results: Revenue growth, speed
– Service revenue increased nearly 400 percent from
1991 to 1998.
– ICM AssetWeb helped IBM reduce proposal
preparation time, increase wins and decrease the
costs of executing engagements by reducing re-use.
– Time savings alone saved $24 million in 1997.
– Time producing deliverables reduced by 40 to 60
percent.
Source: APQC, 2000

35. 35
Case:Case: Hewlett Packard ConsultingHewlett Packard Consulting
 Target: Rapid reuse of best practices and knowledge
since 1996
 HPC has built more than 70 Learning Communities
around the world.
 Knowledge maps have been created for more than 25
percent of the organization’s solutions.
 Senior leadership support of the effort has led to
appointments of knowledge managers through
geography and solution areas.
 KM principles have been integrated into HPC’s New
Hire Orientation and will soon be a part of the project
management training curriculum.
Source: APQC, 2000

36. 36
Case:Case: SchlumbergerSchlumberger
 Target: Put knowledge in the hands of employees
and customers
 Approach: Intranet and extranet, technical
communities. Measures teamwork, value creation,
and innovation.
 Technology: Web enabled
 Results:
– Cost savings and incremental revenue for customers
have been greater than $10 million each to date.
– For the Drilling and Measurement business, SLB has
saved $1 million in training costs through re-use and
sharing.
– Going forward, SLB expects to pass on savings of
more than $100 million per year to customers.
Source: APQC, 2000

37. 37
How are Results Achieved?How are Results Achieved?
TargetTarget
Value PropositionValue Proposition
 Customer intimacy
– Market, sell, service
more effectively
 Product to market
excellence
– Accelerate time to
market
 Operational Excellence
– Create savings, process
improvements and new
capacity
ApproachApproach
 Self-service
 Communities
of Practice
(COPs)
 Facilitated
transfer of best
practices
TechnologyTechnology
 Collaboration
 Workflow & Project
Management
 Repositories
 Content
Management
 Learning
 Portals
 Search Engines &
Locators
 Document
Management
 Problem
Resolution
Systems
 Increase revenuesIncrease revenues
 Decrease costsDecrease costs
 Reduce time toReduce time to
marketmarket
 Improve customerImprove customer
satisfactionsatisfaction
 EnhanceEnhance
perception inperception in
market placemarket place
ResultsResults
Focus on aFocus on a
specificspecific
business needbusiness need
Focus on aFocus on a
specificspecific
business needbusiness need
Substantive resultsSubstantive results
requires goingrequires going
beyond Self-beyond Self-
service approachservice approach
Substantive resultsSubstantive results
requires goingrequires going
beyond Self-beyond Self-
service approachservice approach
Single commonSingle common
infrastructure;infrastructure;
single consistentsingle consistent
interfaceinterface
Single commonSingle common
infrastructure;infrastructure;
single consistentsingle consistent
interfaceinterface
Significant resultsSignificant results
realized in targetedrealized in targeted
areasareas
Significant resultsSignificant results
realized in targetedrealized in targeted
areasareas

38. 38
How does Compaq stack up in KM?How does Compaq stack up in KM?
 Year 2000 KM Honorees in the High-Tech Industry
- America Online - IBM
- Cisco Systems - Lucent Technologies
- Computer Sciences - Microsoft
- Dell - Motorola
- HP - Nokia
- Intel - Xerox
 Compaq has not been mentioned among the top 40
knowledge-based organizations in the three years since
the survey’s inception.
Source: Most Admired Knowledge Enterprises (MAKE) survey, 2000

39. 39
KM Spending SurveyKM Spending Survey
Organization Oper. Exp. Cap. Ex. FTE
(In thousands) (In thousands)
EMEA $500 $75 5
NA $310 $250 8
GBS $4,739 $0 50
M&S $900 $1,800 9
BCSG $450 $50 8
CS $3,000 $360 4
ISSG $1,750 $15 15
PS $2,625 $0 19
SPG $16 $2,146 12
WWSS $550 $0 9
TOTALS $14,840 $4,696 139
Organization Oper. Exp. Cap. Ex. FTE
(In thousands) (In thousands)
EMEA $500 $200 5
NA $1,192 $200 8
GBS $4,889 $1,000 50
M&S $2,000 $2,100 9
BCSG $1,100 $100 8
CS $3,000 $0 4
ISSG $1,800 $50 15
PS $4,460 $150 19
SPG $501 $2,670 12
WWSS $7,250 $3,000 9
TOTALS $26,692 $9,470 139
2000 2001

40. 40
Comments from SurveyComments from Survey
 “I think the biggest difficulty in getting KM to work here is that
usefulness is based on people taking the time to provide current and
useful information. This is time people don’t have. There will have to
be incentives to do so.”
 “Stop the drive-by-toolings and get down into the trenches to see what
individual folks struggle with everyday when working with our
customers.”
 “Please don’t let this program become a tool implementation effort.
There is much, much more to KM than just having tool support.”
 “Establish a KM Organization that would become a pervasive and
accepted part of our culture as is HR, Legal, Finance, Facilities,
Security, etc.”
 “Simplify”
 “Consolidate”
 “Work together”

41. 41
What is Knowledge Management?What is Knowledge Management?
 Systematic approaches to help information and
knowledge flow
– to the right people
– at the right time
– so they can act more efficiently and effectively.
 Find, understand, share and use knowledge to create
value.
Knowledge is information in action

42. 42
KM Program ModelKM Program Model
KM Steering
Committee
KM Program Office
GBU
Function
GBU
Leader
GEO
GEO
Function
Executive
Sponsors
KM
Project
KM
Project

43. 43
KM Steering CommitteeKM Steering Committee
 A forum for surfacing, addressing and solving shared KM issues
and needs
 Creates, captures and leverages KM best practices and approaches
 Supports Communities of Practice and collaboration methods for
transfer of high value tacit knowledge
 Communicates KM messages and successes (internally and
externally)
 Advocates and supports common processes for knowledge
access,management and use

44. 44
KM Program Office BudgetKM Program Office Budget
 KM Program Office Staff (12 FTEs) - $1.5 M
 Consultants/Contractors – $1.5 M
 Communication and Training - $500 K
 Other operating expenses - $1.5 M