Chapter 6 • Managerial Support Systems 239more than two dozen successful KMSs recently imple-
mented in various firms, there are three KMS characteris-
tics that need to be considered in describing a KMS: first,
the extent to which there is formal management and control
of the KMS; second, the focus of the KM processes, such as
knowledge creation, capture, organization and packaging,
access, search and dissemination, and application; and
third, the extent to which reusability of knowledge is con-
sidered (e.g., the 80–20 rule, or 20 percent of the knowl-
edge content that potentially could be contained in a KMS
is likely to be of most value to 80 percent of the users)
(Dennis and Vessey, 2005).
A KMS might have very little formal management
and control, as in the case of “communities of practice”
(COPs). Designed for individuals with similar interests, a
COP KMS provides a vehicle to allow members of such a
community to exchange ideas, tips, and other knowledge
that might be valuable to the members of the community.
There is no formal management or control of such a KMS;
rather, the members are responsible for validating and
structuring their knowledge for use within the KMS. Each
member of the COP is responsible for the knowledge
content, with a great likelihood that such knowledge will
be applicable to only a few members. In other words, there
is very little, if any, organizing and packaging of knowl-
edge, making the search and applicability even more
difficult. Hopefully, there will be occasions where a single
item of knowledge content will be important to many
members of the COP, although these occasions might be
few in number.
In contrast, a KMS might have extensive formal
management and control. There might be a KM team to
oversee the process of validating the knowledge prior to
dissemination. Such a team provides structure, organiza-
tion, and packaging for how knowledge is to be presented
to the users. These dedicated resources ensure that knowl-
edge content entered into the KMS has been thoroughly
examined and that it will meet the 80–20 rule.
This discussion does not imply that a KMS must be
characterized as binary—that is, having either little or
extensive formal management and control, knowledge
processing, or knowledge reusability. Rather, there is a
spectrum of KMSs that are designed to meet the specific
needs of a given firm. In the case of a COP KMS, it is not
clear whether the focus is either operational or market
improvements. On the other hand, the KM team approach
attempts to accomplish both operational and market
improvements. Although KMSs are still growing with
much room for advancement, many firms observe their
KMS evolving from one form to another as they learn from
their experience and as their strategic needs and resources
change. Such evolution suggests that firms are enjoying
the benefits accrued from tapping into their employees’
and organizational knowledge. Moreover, they find a
strategic need to continue their efforts to unveil the hidden
treasures within and outside their organizational boundaries.Two Recent KMS Initiatives within a Pharmaceutical Firm
CORPORATE KMS A KM team was formed to develop an
organization-wide KMS serving multiple communities of
practice. The operation of a community of practice involves
a combination of software and processes. Each community
has a designated coordinator whose job is to ensure that the
community thrives (some communities have two or three
coordinators). The coordinators are volunteers and receive
no extra compensation; however, they do tend to become
highly visible members of their communities. The coordi-
nator performs many specific functions such as welcoming
new members, developing and maintaining standards of
conduct and standards for knowledge within the commu-
nity, maintaining the community calendar, monitoring the
discussion forums, ensuring that the knowledge in the
community is appropriate, and serving as the primary point
of contact and external ambassador for the community.
The portal software used to support the communities
of practice provides approximately 150 tools of which only
a handful are regularly used. The three most commonly
used tools are the discussion forum, tips, and calendar. As
the name suggests, the discussion forum is a tool that
enables question-and-answer discussions among members
of the community. Any member of the community can
pose a question or a request in the discussion forum;
likewise, all members can respond to the items posted in
the discussion. Each discussion item in the forum is
typically started as its own thread, and there are often two
or three active discussion threads, depending on the
community’s size. The community’s coordinator typically
reviews the items in the discussion forum and archives
older discussions. Sometimes the coordinator will decide
that a particular item is useful and relevant over the long
term and should be moved to the tips area. In that case, the
coordinator or the contributors to the discussion will
prepare a more formal version to be stored in the tips area.
The tips tool enables any member of the community
to write a short entry that documents some best practice
advice that the contributor believes might be of interest to
the community as a whole. The full text of all tips is
searchable, so the members of the community can find tips
of interest.
The coordinator maintains the community calendar.
Members of the community typically e-mail the coordina-
tor with suggested calendar items, which the coordinator