CHAPTER 7

Knowledge Transfer

Christos Anagiotos, Catherine Haynes, and James Alexander

Human beings learn from one other because this behavior comes naturally to us (Vygotsky, 1978). As modern humans, we find ways to communicate and transfer ideas and information from one to the other through conversations, books, videos, the Internet, and other means. However, despite the importance and value of all this knowledge, its transfer does not always operate efficiently—especially in large and complicated organizations, such as government agencies, where complex structures, strict rules and procedures, and the division of labor (e.g., specialization) may complicate communication between individuals. In such cases, carefully designed and maintained knowledge transfer practices are required for knowledge to flow to where it is needed.

Why, though, is knowledge transfer so important for large organizations like the federal government? Why do we need to include knowledge transfer in the talent management process if we are already applying the best human resource practices presented in previous chapters? We may find answers in basic principles of knowledge and knowledge transfer.

It is widely understood in both the academic and professional communities that a clear correlation exists between experience and knowledge (Bion, 1962; Boud et al., 1993; Kolb, 1984). Experience is not just a way to acquire knowledge; it can also facilitate the generation of new knowledge. For example, a new employee can acquire necessary knowledge by performing his or her job for some time, thus gaining more experience (“acquisition of existing knowledge through experience”); on the other hand, an experienced employee, using experience as a guide, can offer an innovative suggestion that will solve a problem or make a process more efficient (“generation of new knowledge through experience”).

Although hiring the right person with knowledge relevant to the job is key (as discussed in Chapter 2), most of the knowledge a worker uses is acquired on the job. Especially when working, people learn by doing and, usually, the more they perform a task the better at it they become: They learn from practice, from repetition, from mistakes, from trial and error. Naturally, then, more-experienced employees have more work-related knowledge than less-experienced employees. Knowledge gained from experience is one of the most valuable forms of knowledge for organizations, because it is relevant to the whole organization as well as to a particular job.

So long as the experienced, knowledgeable worker remains in the organization, that knowledge stays within the organization, where it works to facilitate the worker’s functions and, as a result, those of the organization. But, realistically, we must acknowledge that people leave their organizations all the time for numerous and varied reasons: They change jobs, they change careers, they relocate, they retire. Clearly, it would be unfortunate for the organization if this knowledge, acquired through perhaps decades of experience, were to vanish as a consequence of a single person’s leaving the organization.

But this is just one case to illustrate the importance of knowledge transfer to an organization. Another example is that of large organizations in which employees work at similar tasks but in different departments. If these people do not have a way to communicate, share, and transfer knowledge, they may need to use valuable resources to solve a problem already solved by a colleague in a different department, or even in the same department at an earlier time. Effective transfer of knowledge can save valuable resources and prevent costly duplication.

Typically, less than 20 percent of the knowledge available to an organization is used or reused (DeLong, 2004), partly because of the lack of effective knowledge transfer practices in many organizations. Considering that the average worker spends from 15 to 35 percent of his or her time searching for information and is successful in finding it only 50 percent of the time or less (Sinclair, 2006), organizations should pay particular attention to how workers transfer and retain already-acquired information and knowledge within an organization.

If the transfer of knowledge is so important, how should federal agencies (and organizations in general) ensure that this much-needed process occurs and that valuable knowledge doesn’t either sit unused or leave the organization along with the people who possess it? Wouldn’t it be better to retain this knowledge within the organization no matter which employee leaves the organization? The answers to those questions are central to our last chapter. Federal agencies are reworking their knowledge management practices to better keep the knowledge their employees possess and at the same time move it to employees who need it. But organizations outside the federal government also manage to successfully transfer knowledge between employees; we present some of the methods they use to achieve this transfer. Indeed, such organizations can serve as models for federal agencies seeking to improve their knowledge transfer methods and practices.

KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER DEFINITIONS

Knowledge and knowledge transfer are widely used terms but are defined differently by different authors and in different fields. The definitions below best represent our understanding of these and related terms, and it is these definitions that are used throughout the chapter.

Information can be defined as data that have been given meaning. Knowledge, on the other hand, is information gained, know-how acquired, and skills developed by a person through experience and education and which, when combined with understanding, enable action. Knowledge can be used by the original holder after it has been transferred to others; therefore, it is sharable. Because knowledge moves at lightning speed, thanks to the electronic workplace, it is also transportable (Abbasi et al., 2009). Knowledge management is the overall process of organizing, maintaining, and communicating organizational knowledge so it can be used to meet organizational goals and objectives. Knowledge transfer is a step in the knowledge management process that moves knowledge from where it is stored to where it can be used.

Furthermore, in all organizations there are essentially three kinds of knowledge: explicit, tacit, and common. Explicit knowledge is easily codified, written down, and expressed in documents, practices, and training. It is that part of an organization’s knowledge that can be articulated and recorded in protocols, memoranda, and guidelines. This is also commonly referred to as policy (U.S. Army Field Manual, 2012).

Tacit knowledge refers to the information embedded in the workplace experiences of employees; it is encompassed by their memories. Each person in the organization gains tacit knowledge from interaction with people outside the organization (e.g., customers and clients), life experiences, and coworkers and professional acquaintances.

Common knowledge is the information known across an organization, and it can be understood as either explicit knowledge in practice or tacit knowledge that is assumed to be explicit (i.e., everyone knows that). An effective knowledge management process ensures that all three types of knowledge across an organization are carefully selected, placed in order, and successfully delivered to the right place within the organization so that it can be used to meet performance or productivity mandates (U.S. Army Field Manual, 2012). Figure 7.1 is the authors’ conception of how these different types of knowledge are shared among workers (based on Dixon, 2000).

FIGURE 7.1. Conception of Types of Knowledge

Adapted from Dixon, 2000.

COMPLEXITY OF KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER

A number of factors increase the complexity of knowledge transfer. Two that have a major impact are the multiple generations now in the workforce and the emergence of the knowledge economy.

Multiple Generations

Four generations, born from 1925 through 1995, are now in the workplace. Each has a different orientation to the world of work and technology and different experiences relating to how knowledge should be shared in organizations. These differing orientations already affect, and will continue to affect, how knowledge is shared and distributed throughout organizations. Another area of difference is that where Veterans and Baby Boomers sought to maintain a long-term affiliation with just one dedicated employer, Gen X and Gen Y tend to seek more portable arrangements with multiple employers to reach their career aspirations. One implication of this trend is the consequent need to make knowledge transfer an ongoing activity in organizations.

Rise of the Knowledge Economy

The changing attitudes of recent entrants to the workplace and the resulting imperative to accommodate their skills and needs are part of a larger trend influencing organizational knowledge transfer. Since the United States’ founding, its economy has shifted from an agriculture-based economy to an industrial one and subsequently a knowledge economy:

The composition of organizations and enterprises in a knowledge economy is vastly different from that of the organizations of the industrial age. New features include matrix organizations, complex technology architecture, high levels of diversity, and rapid rates of change. Government entities must be more agile and resilient in the knowledge economy to meet their mandate to serve the needs of citizens.

Taking all these factors into consideration, let’s revisit the question we asked earlier: Why do we need to include knowledge transfer in the talent management process? A better answer is that knowledge transfer enables workers to keep pace with the knowledge economy.

Best Practices in Knowledge Transfer

The appreciation of the value of knowledge-sharing and teamwork in the workplace is a recent development. Many organizations in both the private and public sectors are still in the early stages of developing learning strategies and communities of practice. Several examples of knowledge transfer practices in federal agencies are described below.

STRATEGIES TO SAFEGUARD KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER WITHIN FEDERAL AGENCIES

An effective and efficient organization is one in which information and knowledge flow freely and quickly. Knowledge transfer should be part of an organization’s culture and strategic planning (Ward, 2011).

Within the federal government, knowledge transfer is defined by each branch of service and within each major area of responsibility. In many cases, it is absolutely essential that knowledge be passed down from predecessor to incumbent in a timely manner—that is, before the predecessor has departed to another assignment. This allows the new incumbent to start working right away, with minimal time spent getting up to speed, and it allows the predecessor to deposit best practices.

Knowledge management is essential for federal agencies to be efficient and manage employee turnover, so much so that different branches of the federal government recognize knowledge gaps when a department is in a transition from one leader to the next. To handle such gaps, each agency publishes guidelines and regulations to assist employees with knowledge transfer and knowledge management. The Federal Knowledge Management Initiative, a subgroup under the KMWG, implements knowledge management practices. In an open letter to federal government leaders (2009), its chair, Neil Olonoff, offered guidelines for formal knowledge management governance (Figure 7.2):

•  Establish a federal knowledge management center to serve as a resource for agencies in carrying out their own knowledge management efforts. The center would provide consulting and serve as a clearinghouse for federal knowledge management resources, such as software, expertise, and lessons learned.

•  Establish a federal chief knowledge officer position. This person, the face of federal knowledge management, would coordinate with federal departments to explain the benefits of sharing and collaborating across agencies.

•  Enact knowledge management governance. Set governmentwide policies, standards, and practices that specify the general direction and intent of federal knowledge-sharing efforts.

•  Establish awareness and a Web presence. Communicate the serious need for knowledge management and distribute content “from those who know to those who need to know.”

•  Build a knowledge-sharing culture in the federal government.

FIGURE 7.2. Roadmap for Formal Knowledge Management Governance

Based on Olonoff, 2009.

•  Train federal workers in knowledge management skills. By learning knowledge management competencies, they will acquire a deeper understanding and appreciation of the value of knowledge sharing.

•  Meet the challenges of the retirement “age wave.” Knowledge management includes “knowledge retention”—the effort to reduce “brain drain” due to thousands of retiring Baby Boomers.

The Army embraces knowledge management as an essential component of mission readiness. Its publication Field Manual 6-01.1, Knowledge Management Operations, provides guidance on how to use knowledge management to benefit its personnel through shared understanding and increased collaboration between leaders and subordinates (2012). According to the Army, knowledge management involves four major dimensions: people, processes, tools, and the organization itself (Figure 7.3).

FIGURE 7.3. Major Dimensions of Knowledge Management

U.S. Army, 2012.

People are the members of an organization, both inside and outside, who establish, produce, apply, and transfer knowledge and the leaders who provide action on that knowledge. People are the key to successful knowledge transfer; 80 to 90 percent of all knowledge in any given area exists as individual insights, experiences, and proficiencies. Processes are the methods used to establish, produce, apply, and transfer knowledge. This component relies largely on groups, teams, and individuals. Tools refer to the system an organization uses to organize knowledge products and services. The use of technology gives members a common ground on which to operate. Organization refers to the place and space in which people, processes, and tools operate. Collectively, they represent the organizational culture. Knowing and understanding the culture enables knowledge-sharing.

APPROACHES TO ENHANCING KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER

Table 7.1 lists some approaches employed by federal agencies and other organizations to capture and transfer valuable knowledge.

Mentoring Programs

Mentoring programs are a very effective way to facilitate the transfer of knowledge. A mentor may be any worker with experience, and a protégé is a worker without that experience. In many organizations, mentors and protégés are paired together because they have something in common and have expressed an interest in mentoring. The purpose of a mentoring program is to get two partners communicating in such a way as to share knowledge and develop successful, productive workers (Rothwell and Chee, 2013). To this end, managers of a mentoring program should answer the following questions before the program starts:

•  Is the organization committed to facilitating mentoring?

•  What are the desired outcomes?

•  Would mentoring achieve the desired outcomes?

TABLE 7.1. Programs to Enhance Knowledge Transfer

•  Are there sufficient meeting times between the mentor and protégé?

•  Is this partnership in alignment with the organization’s strategic goals?

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) provides guidance on implementing formal, informal, situational, and virtual mentoring programs (2008):

•  Formal: Requires preparation and organizational support from leaders, managers, and supervisors.

•  Informal: Normally implemented for interpersonal development but is also used to promote career development.

•  Situational: Provides help based on the immediate situation; may be just-in-time guidance and advice.

•  Virtual mentoring: Refers to the use of videoconferencing, email, or social networking sites in mentoring. Mentor and protégé communicate in ways other than the traditional face-to-face mode. This is most applicable when an employee is working from home or the job requires a lot of travel.

Mentors, protégés, and supervisors should conduct a program evaluation at each step to ensure success. This evaluation should give critical information about the program and allow feedback from all individuals involved. Mentors should provide a written evaluation to their protégés. Together, mentor and protégé should provide written feedback to the supervisor on the program and recommendations for future relationships.

Just as there are different types of mentoring programs, there are different types of mentors:

•  Career guide: Promotes protégé development by assisting with career guidance, counseling, and visibility.

•  Intellectual guide: Provides meaningful feedback and information to the mentee on areas that need improvement; promotes an equal relationship and collaborates on projects with the protégé.

•  Information source: Provides information to employees on informal and formal expectations.

•  Friend: Engages in casual social interactions with the protégé, providing company information as needed.

Best Practices in Mentoring

Job Shadowing

Like mentoring, job shadowing programs pair a less-experienced person with a more-experienced employee. The less-experienced observer follows the more-experienced host during his or her routine activities. Observers see how hosts organize their days, how they deal with issues as they arise, and so on; ideally, the host includes the observer in his or her tasks, perhaps talking aloud while solving a problem so that the participant can “listen in.” The host may also offer hands-on experience under direct supervision; in these cases, the observer performs a task that the host would normally do (Rothwell, 2011).

Job shadowing is a powerful way for the inexperienced employee to explore different roles in the organization in a safe environment, early in his or her career. Through this experience, the employee can determine which roles are more suitable and plan the appropriate career path to reach the desired position. This also is a useful test of the employee for the organization, allowing it to determine the employee’s suitability for those positions.

Communities of Practice

Etienne Wenger and Jean Lave were the first to use the term communities of practice. According to Wenger et al. (2002:4), “[c]ommunities of practice are groups of people who share a concern, a set of problems, or a passion about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and expertise in this area by interacting on an ongoing basis.” Communities of practice are formed naturally by people who engage in a process of collective learning in a shared domain of human endeavor. Learning can be the reason for the formation of the community, but it can also be just an incidental outcome of the members’ interactions. For example, a community of practice can be a group of engineers who work on similar projects (not necessarily in the same organization) and who find it useful to compare designs and discuss issues and ideas relevant to their work. In this case, a desire for learning drives the formation and existence of the community. But gang members surviving in the street may be said to form a community of practice for which learning is an incidental outcome; the reason for this community’s existence is survival.

A community of practice can also be a group of artists who meet in a café or studio to debate about new techniques in painting; gamers who meet online and share information on how to “kill” a “monster” in a newly released online game; or teachers who discuss how they deal with students. These groups of people share information and insights, they help each other to solve problems, they create new things together, and so on. It is through the process of sharing information and experiences with the group that the members learn from each other and have an opportunity to develop themselves personally and professionally. Members become informally bound by the value that they find in learning together (Lave and Wenger, 1991; Wenger-Trayner, 2013). The transfer of knowledge from one member to the other is a constant process in a community of practice.

Not every community is a community of practice. For example, a neighborhood, although often called a community, is usually not a community of practice. Three important characteristics must belong to a community for it to be considered a community of practice (Wenger-Trayner, 2013):

1. Domain. A community of practice has an identity defined by a shared domain of interest. To be member of such a community, one must have a commitment to the domain and a set of skills that distinguishes the member from other people. Hence, a community of practice is not just a network of people or a group of friends.

2. Community. The members of a community of practice have built relationships that enable them to learn from each other (i.e., transfer knowledge) by engaging in joint activities and discussions, helping each other, and sharing information.

3. Practice. The members of a community of practice are practitioners in a field relevant to the domain around which the community of practice was created. The development of a shared practice may be intentional or unintentional. Accountants who meet to discuss problems with a particular kind of client do so intentionally, whereas a group of math teachers who meet every day in the school cafeteria may not realize that their informal lunch discussions are one of their main sources of knowledge about how to teach math to sixth-graders.

Communities of practice may adopt a number of information-seeking activities to develop their practice. Table 7.2 presents a few typical examples suggested by Wenger-Trayner (2013).

TABLE 7.2. Examples of Communities of Practice Activities

Wenger-Trayner, 2013.

Although communities of practice can be formed naturally by individuals coming together, many organizations encourage such communities to form by providing an appropriate environment. Today, almost any larger organization has adopted initiatives to support communities of practice, because in organizational settings they function as a tool for knowledge transfer, problem solving, and performance improvement. Communities of practice are not called that in all organizations, however; sometimes they are called learning networks, thematic groups, or, in the case of the Chrysler Corporation, tech clubs.

In 1988, Chrysler adopted an innovative knowledge system to reduce the time needed to get a new vehicle design to the market. At the time, Chrysler was traditionally organized, being divided into large units each dealing with a different part of the manufacturing process: design, engineering, manufacturing, and sales. This model limited the interaction between units and slowed the process of product development. With the new model, engineers no longer belonged to the engineering department but to one of five “car platforms.” Each platform focused on the production of one vehicle type: large cars, small cars, minivans, trucks, or Jeeps. Each platform was responsible for all phases of the development of one type.

Chrysler succeeded in reducing the product development cycle from five to two and a half years. This reduced research and development costs, but the new model created issues of duplication: for example, multiple versions of the same part with minor variations, similar mistakes in different platforms, innovation that could have been used in multiple platforms but stayed in one of them, and so on. The company was unable to learn outside the confines of the platforms.

The solution finally came from informal meetings between former colleagues from functional areas who were now working in different platforms. These colleagues formed the first communities of practice in the company. Designers came together regularly to share their designs and get feedback from designers who worked in other platforms, brake engineers did the same, and so on. Later, recognizing the value of these communities to the company, managers formalized the role of these groups and gave them the name “tech club.” Tech clubs progressively became an integral part of Chrysler’s vehicle product-development division (Wenger et al., 2002).

Like Chrysler and other businesses, some government agencies use communities of practice for learning transfer and knowledge sharing within an agency. Other communities of practice involve people from different agencies who come together to solve bigger issues that require coordination and knowledge transfer between agencies and across different levels of government, such as matters of education, health, and security.

Best-Practice Studies or Meetings

Every organization has its own best practices worth sharing among its members. These practices can themselves provide a format for sharing experiences and knowledge within an organization. Stories of how the organization performed at its best, how it or its members accomplished something, and the lessons learned from those experiences can be shared as best practices (Camp, 2006; Stapenhurst, 2009).

Best practices can be chosen from any part of an organization’s operating cycle and should be shared with as many employees as possible. A big organization may form a team to look for best practices around the organization, document them, and then bring the people involved to other teams to talk about what they are doing. In smaller organizations, individuals or teams can report what they consider the best practices in the performance of their jobs or those used by colleagues or other teams. Some or all of these practices may then be presented to the rest of the organization (Rothwell, 2011), perhaps at a staff meeting through a short presentation followed by discussion and questions.

Usually the presenters are experienced employees who have arrived at their best practices over the course of their tenure. It is very important that less-experienced employees take advantage of these presentations, because in addition to the knowledge offered by experienced colleagues, they can gain equally valuable information about the organizational culture and the way things are done (Camp, 2006).

Critical Incident Interviews or Question

Critical incident interviews or questionnaires were introduced in the 1950s to tap an organization’s experience. As suggested by its name, this method of knowledge transfer documents the lessons learned from critical incidents (i.e., difficult situations in an organization’s history) using questionnaires or interviews with employees who played a key role in an incident. Through these interviews, the organization attempts to collect all relevant information in one place. The interviews are transcribed and analyzed for common themes and cross-checked with the completed questionnaires.

Lessons are thereby preserved in a format that can benefit future members of the organization and employees who were not directly involved in the incident, as well as those who were actually involved. The organization has a record of what happened during the incident, how people responded to it, and any actions taken that worked along with those that did not work. The next time the organization faces a similar situation, the records can be used to assist in making decisions. Even if the people who participated in the initial incident are no longer employees, the organization can still benefit from their experience and the knowledge they gained. The critical incident method is thus an indirect way to transfer knowledge between employees.

Organizations that systematically use the critical incident method over time form an expert system that can be used extensively in training. Rather than reading artificial case studies, trainees can confront real-life critical incidents in documentary form, analyze the information contained in them, and even come up with new and more effective solutions. Table 7.3 presents an example of a questionnaire designed to capture critical incidents in either a written or interview format.

TABLE 7.3. Questionnaire to Capture Critical Incident Knowledge

Rothwell, 2004.

Storytelling

In this context, storytelling refers to narration of the events in a particular situation. Storytelling is a great opportunity for more experienced employees to pass on knowledge of what really happened, and it can be done at any time: a transfer, a promotion, or even a termination. Most wisdom is in fact passed on through storytelling in the workplace (Rothwell, 2011). People who have been on the job for a long time have many stories to tell; the key to knowledge transfer is for the newcomer to listen to those stories and draw lessons from them. According to Swap (2010), storytelling can leverage the knowledge of an organization, especially informal knowledge; it also builds the organization’s core capabilities. Some stories can also take the form of lessons learned or the best take-away from a situation. For example, the more experienced employee may tell a story about a time when a particular incident happened, the customer’s reaction, and the chain of events because of that action or inaction on the part of an employee.

Storytelling Best Practices

Storyboard

A storyboard is a series of pictures that tell a story. In some situations, using a lot of words to describe what we do can be confusing; a storyboard can show a process with fewer words and, in many cases, more successfully. This mode of communication can be another way of both transferring and storing knowledge (Begleiter, 2010: Christisano, 2007). Storyboards are most effective when they describe procedures and when a live demonstration is impossible. Language barriers are another challenge that storyboards can easily overcome.

Usually, the experienced employee works with a professional designer to come up with a storyboard, but specialized software that anyone can use is available. Another approach is to recruit a less-experienced employee to help prepare a storyboard, allowing him or her to gain valuable knowledge about a procedure. If stored properly, storyboards can benefit less-experienced employees for an indefinite period.

Process Documentation

Process documentation aims to present and document processes that take place in the organization (e.g., the process of placing a purchase order for raw material or the process of hiring new employees) using flowcharts, concept maps, or procedure manuals. Usually the flowchart or concept map presents the process; along with the flowchart or concept map comes a document that explains what each worker involved in the process should do (under general or particular circumstances) and how to do it for the process to move smoothly. It may include variations for special circumstances.

Process can be helpful in documenting, storing, and transferring knowledge from more- to less-experienced employees. A good process documentation flowchart should provide an employee or a group of employees that never performed the process before with the relevant information and necessary details to perform the process without needing direct contact or other help from a more experienced colleague who performed the process before. Process documentation ensures that all information is retained in the organization even after experienced employees retire—or forget how a certain process was handled in the past.

Process documentation can be done using any of several flowchart techniques or software programs. A number of free software packages are available online to facilitate process documentation and guide users in producing consistent documents (e.g., “Synthis” software aids in business process mapping and modeling; www.synthis.com).

Blogs

A blog (a portmanteau of the term Web log) is an opinion, discussion, reportage, or informational website that is maintained by an individual or group of individuals and is regularly updated with new “posts.” Many blogs are essentially online diaries; others may include documents, videos, or other media as well as links to other published sources of information.

A team blog can be an easy way to preserve and transfer knowledge between incoming and outgoing members. For example, if a junior executive writes a daily blog about his or her unit’s activities, an incoming employee can read about these activities before coming on board. A blog can also be used by experienced employees to post details and artifacts about a common or difficult work situation and explain how and why they acted the way they did as well as report the outcome. Organizations can offer a space on the Web for employees to keep blogs and ask or require employees to use blogs to share knowledge (Rothwell, 2011:140).

Social Networking

Social networking now comes in two forms: the traditional face-to-face approach and electronic “social media” using online technologies. Because networking can foster informal relationships between more-and less-experienced employees, it provides a pathway for transferring knowledge.

Many successful companies go to great lengths to ensure their employees have access to both forms to facilitate overall networking. Microsoft maintains restaurants and coffee shops in common areas on its premises to encourage employees to stay on campus for their breaks and meet people from other departments. Google famously installs playrooms with pool tables and other games so their employees can get to know one other in a relaxing environment. Apple locates its restrooms in an easily accessible, central location so that employees from all departments are forced to engage in short conversations—which can initiate networking.

Social-networking websites are a digital form of networking many organizations encourage their employees to use; some even set up chat rooms. Generally, employees prefer the most up-to-date technologies for networking: Facebook pages, Google+ circles, Twitter, and LinkedIn. Indeed, knowledge transfer does not always need to happen under close organizational supervision—however, organizations must ensure that sensitive information cannot escape to public places like the Web.

Social Networking Best Practices

Electronic Performance Support Systems

An electronic performance support system (EPSS) combines artificial intelligence, an expert system, real-time e-learning methods, and a database (Brown, 1996). It is considered the most sophisticated method of storing and transferring knowledge. The main drawbacks are the enormous cost of designing and maintaining such systems and the long lead time needed for their design and development (Rothwell, 2004).

The purpose of an EPSS is to provide assistance to the user concerning all related aspects of his or her job tasks, using all information on hand, filtering it through an intelligent processing system, and thereafter providing the user with helpful information and analysis for any given task. A fully developed EPSS provides the user with instant information about any aspect of the work in hand, ranging from simple answers to “how to” questions and information about organization policies to real-time coaching and online training (Stone and Potter, 2010).