A
WORKING BY WIRE
SM TM
WHITE PAPER
Team Knowledge Management:
A Computer-Mediated Approach
Dr. John Gundry
Knowledge Ability Ltd
Malmesbury UK
and
Dr. George Metes
Virtual Learning Systems, Inc.
Manchester NH, USA
December 1996
Published at http://www.knowab.co.uk/wbwteam.html
An exploration of the Knowledge Management ideas in this paper,
in the context of agile strategic competitiveness, is included in our new
book Agile Networking: Competing Through the Internet and Intranets.
Go to the website http://www.knowab.co.uk/an-wbw
to learn more about Agile Networking.
Knowledge Ability Ltd provides Knowledge Management consulting,
described at http://www.knowab.co.uk/km
|
"CEOs, when asked how much of the knowledge which is available to
the company is actually used, responded 'only about 20%.' (Gottlieb Duttweiler
Foundation). Yet, if this figure represented average utilization
of production capacity, it would only be acceptable to the most foolhardy
CEOs." From the Agility Forum's Agile People Enterprise Development
Group Newsletter, Iacocca Institute, Pennsylvania, November 1996
1. The need for knowledge management
The increasing use of electronic group collaboration tools to support team
work has fueled interest in the ways by which what goes on when people
use those tools can be captured, stored, and re-used by others. Called
'knowledge management', this is important for enterprises whose principal
currency is knowledge, rather than physical or financial resources. These
are enterprises who have always been wholly devoted to knowledge work,
such as consultancies; a growing number of enterprises who discover that
knowledge of how to produce products is as salable as the products themselves;
and any enterprise who realizes that its knowledge is an asset to be managed.
The ability of enterprises to manage knowledge as an asset (and provide
a return on investment and potentially revenue) is seen by strategies such
as Agility (1) as the key to survival in a global business environment
in which the efficiencies of mass production of commodity goods have been
successfully exported to low-wage economies.
The core issue of knowledge management is to place knowledge under management
remit to get value from it - to realize intellectual capital. That intellectual
capital can be regarded as a major determiner of the difference between
a company's book price and the total value of its stock. For a successful
company, this difference can be considerable, representing the difference
between the way the company is seen by accountants and by the market. For
example, there is a great difference between the book price and share value
of recently-launched biotechnology companies, whose market value is clearly
based on their knowledge assets, rather than traditional capital.
However, while the world of business is experienced in managing physical
and financial capital, companies have difficulty in finding cost-effective
solutions to simple practical questions concerning knowledge, such as:
-
"We have four people in Boston who know how to solve this problem. How
can we get them to help our team in Korea?"
-
"People are leaving the company with a lifetime's experience. How can we
capture and re-use that?"
-
"We had a team that did a successful proposal for aerospace five years
ago. Why did they make the decisions they did? How did they deal with the
customer? What made the team tick?"
-
"How do we start learning from our experiences and help our people stop
repeating others' mistakes?"
-
"We're involved in an exciting project with four other companies. How can
we all learn how these virtual teams tick?"
-
"Needs change often these days and we're always bringing new people into
projects. How can we get them up to speed and contributing quickly?"
While there are no categorical or perfect answers to any of these questions,
a powerful set of solutions involves one of the electronic collaboration
tools used for today's distributed group work, as will be explored in this
paper. These solutions address three current trends that are making knowledge
management especially significant today:
-
need (post-industrial, knowledge-based commerce),
-
awareness (growth of interest in virtual teaming and knowledge management),
-
accessible technologies (electronic collaboration tools).
This combination makes now a defining moment for organizational computing.
By understanding these challenges, then appreciating the capabilities of
available technologies, and then knowing how to build virtual teaming skills
and create knowledge management strategies, enterprises can seize this
moment and dramatically increase their ability to compete into the next
century.
2. Operational characteristics of knowledge
There is no easy way to usefully define a concept as complex as knowledge.
One-liners remain feebly abstract ("Knowledge is useable information"),
encyclopedic treatises dismay the reader with detail. Here we will pragmatically
define knowledge in terms of those operational characteristics that we
must appreciate if we are to capture, store and utilize knowledge to sound
business ends.
2.1 Knowledge is a human capability
The authors regard knowledge as a human capability rather than a property
of an inanimate object such as a book or computer record. We see knowledge
as a personal capability like a skill, experience, or intelligence: a capability
to do or to judge something, now or in the future. This capability can
be acquired by an individual as a result of reading, seeing, listening
to, or feeling (physically or emotionally) something. What is read, seen,
heard or felt is not the knowledge, rather it is the medium through which
knowledge may be transferred.
Note that one says "Here's the information you wanted about ....." but
not "Here's the knowledge about ...". In our language we recognize that
knowledge is the result of a personal transform.
2.2 Knowledge acquisition is a dynamic
The above distinction is important. It means that "knowledge management
tools" don't really manage knowledge, but help capture, organize, store
and transmit source material from which an individual may acquire knowledge.
Whether an individual does acquire knowledge from a source depends on a
dynamic interaction in which two factors are important here:
-
the similarity between the person's context (their situation, history and
assumptions) and the context described,
-
the degree of congruence between how the material is structured and how
the structure of the domain appears to the reader.
Hence we see the acquisition of knowledge (and especially business knowledge)
as highly dependent on two very subjective constructs: context and structure.
A report that transfers knowledge to one person may not transfer it to
another if they do not share sufficient context with the author to understand
what is described or cannot employ the material in way in which it is structured.
2.3 Knowledge is generative
Having knowledge means having an appreciation at the level of a map or
a web, rather than a non-dimensional data point, or a one-dimensional fact.
It means one can explain, explore and apply interpolations and abstractions.
Most importantly to have knowledge means that one can generate new appropriate
statements about a subject, not just reproduce the statements that were
received.
(To be a licensed London black cab driver, candidates have to pass an
examination which takes two to three years' preparation. The examination
tests their ability to describe the location of every street and major
building in Greater London, and to construct the best route from any place
to any other place under different traffic conditions. London cabbies call
this qualification "The Knowledge".)
2.4 Knowledge is elaborate
While one talks of "a piece of information", one refers to "a body of knowledge".
That "body" is an extensive, organized set of information. It comes in
large packets. Knowledge does not come in soundbites. It's transferred
through courses or books, or acquired through experience. The expectation
is that people acquire knowledge (learn) over days or weeks rather than
minutes and hours.
2.5 Knowledge about work is best acquired through work
Knowledge about work can be best acquired (learned) through work itself.
A whole field of learning, ethnomethodology, has grown up around the superiority
of learning-in-work. Knowledge acquired in work comes without the abstraction
and restructuring required to present it in a lecture, book, film or cassette.
One less translation means one less layer to deconstruct to map the knowledge
to the individual's own perspective. London cabbies learn by driving the
streets of London on motorbikes.
2.6 Dialogue is knowledge
For centuries, books have been published for the explicit purpose of letting
others acquire knowledge. Today, enterprises publish great amounts of material
internally and externally about their methods and products. We call this
publication knowledge.
There exists, however, another type of knowledge which is accessible
to the modern business: dialogue knowledge. Dialogue knowledge is entailed
in what people communicate to each other in the course of their work. It
comprises formal and informal communication and includes any accompanying
materials. Modern collaboration tools, and especially computer conferencing,
allow what people write and send to each other to be stored, and that stored
material becomes a rich base from which people can acquire knowledge.
This paper focuses on dialogue, not publication. While published knowledge
is important, and indeed dominates current discussions of intranets, it
is an information management rather than a knowledge management issue.
Today's challenge is to capture knowledge from what people say and do as
part of their day to day work and to make it accessible to others.
3. The challenge of team knowledge management
With increasing emphasis on knowledge-based business rather than production-based
business, management is seeking ways to get that knowledge under management
remit. The goal is to manage this aspect of the enterprise in the same
way as its physical and financial assets.
Charged with this are the new roles of "knowledge managers" or "chief
learning officers," with responsibility for creating the environment and
process for dealing with knowledge as a corporate asset.
Typically the knowledge management process involves:
-
Capture
-
Organization and Storage
-
Distribution, or better, Sharing
-
Application or Leverage
Central to current concerns is the issue of team knowledge management.
Teams, ascribed as the powerhouse of the effective enterprise (2), are
more intractable from a knowledge management point of view than individuals.
By their very nature teams create a great deal of new knowledge, which
as such is of high value to the enterprise. However, the knowledge of how
and why they created what they created is more difficult to get at than
an individual's knowledge, since it exists in a number of different people,
and also in their continuous interaction, a small proportion of which is
usually recorded.
In the following sections we will look more closely at team knowledge
management in relation to both a traditional approach, and a new computer-mediated
approach.
3.1 Traditional approach to team knowledge management
Knowledge management has always been with us in the sense that enterprises
have wished to capture and document process, for purposes of quality, automation,
or to create documented methodologies.
While routine work may be adequately captured for the purposes of quality
or automation, enterprises often set out to capture non-routine work processes
in documented methodologies. These are an explicit exercise in knowledge
management, getting the knowledge from "people who have done it" documented
and available across the enterprise. There are however major problems with
documented methodologies: context and dialogue.
3.1.1 Problem of context
If the methodology is too strongly related to a particular context then
it may fail to be seen as relevant to another context. For example, many
development process innovations are applicable across a wide set of products.
But if the development process is documented wholly within the paradigm
of, say, hardware development, it may not be useful for teams developing
software. If the author moves too far in the other direction, however,
the methodology becomes too abstract and too generic, and it becomes hard
to relate it to any practical situation.
3.1.2 Problem of dialogue
The second problem with methodologies is that they typically only document
the explicit, or formal task elements of a process. Rarely is the tacit,
or informal, process which actually took place documented. Hence they do
not capture the dialogue, telling of the dynamics, uncertainties, insights,
interactions and deliberations which made the process successful. While
they may set down the 'what' of a process, they usually fail to set down
the 'why' of its steps. Even if authors try to capture the 'why', such
methodologies are written after the event, when people have forgotten the
informal process and the 'why'.
Thus they fail to capture the reality of 'how'. The subsequent user
of a methodology then either needs to spend time with someone who was involved
in the documented process, or get that person into the new team. Much of
the hardest-won and highest-value operational information about the process
still resides in the heads of people who were personally involved, and
remains uncaptured, unshared and unapplied by others.
3.2 A computer-mediated approach to team knowledge management
Against this picture of the problems of post-hoc, documented methodologies
successfully to manage knowledge, we want to discuss another strategy for
knowledge management. This is based on capturing as much as possible of
the reality of the work as it was done by the team who did it. In this
approach, the knowledge is captured as it is created using the same tools
as used in the work. Knowledge about the work can be used as soon as it
is shared in the work. And it is immediately applicable to any other work
where it fits.
3.2.1 Knowledge management and computer conferencing
Our background is over twenty years' experience in equipping enterprises
to adopt and make the most effective use of electronic collaboration tools:
email, voice mail, and computer, audio and video conferencing. We address
the behaviors, methods, approaches and protocols which are required if
these tools are to support the work of distributed groups and teams. The
application has always been the creation, capture, sharing and application
of organizational knowledge.
Recently, our companies partnered to develop the WORKING
BY WIRE
SM TM program, a true
"virtual service" delivered electronically world-wide, that equips distributed
team members to "work together apart". Going beyond the usual level of
tool skills, WORKING BY WIRE
addresses the behaviors, methods, approaches and protocols required to
support distributed team work. A full description of WORKING
BY WIRE
is viewable at http://www.knowab.co.uk/wbw.
Our central focus has always been the process historically
known as computer conferencing. Invented roughly twenty years ago, computer
conferencing has an impressive history of supporting work, social and educational
activities. Today this technology-based process is mature as a key enabler
of the virtual, online team work undertaken by today's distributed, knowledge-based
enterprises. Also known also as bulletin boards, data conferencing, web
conferencing, or groupware, this tested communications capability is the
foundation of products called "* Notes", "* Share", "* Team" or "Team *".
Computer conferencing has special significance for knowledge
management for the simple reason that when a team uses computer conferencing
to collaborate, a permanent, shareable, record of what they write and send
to each other is created. That record captures the knowledge that the team
created and applied to its work, and is the basis for managing the team's
knowledge. This permanent shareable record is not created when people use
collaboration tools such as telephone, email, or audio and video conferencing.
As one experienced user said- "These tools leave no footprint."
Use of computer conferencing to achieve team knowledge
management is described in the following case example.
3.2.2 Team computer-mediated knowledge management: case example
Five years ago we were involved in a major proposal made
by an international information and communications systems company to a
US aerospace manufacturer. The proposal covered all the office, design,
manufacturing and support systems for the life-cycle of new commercial
aircraft. New integrated, concurrent development techniques were to be
applied to its development.
We were involved in the proposal in two roles. Firstly,
we were recruited to create proposal material showing how online, distributed
work could accelerate the customer's concurrent development process. Secondly,
we took on the role of creating process for the concurrent working of the
proposal team itself, which eventually numbered 140 people across eleven
US states and six countries.
3.2.2.1 Role and use of computer conferencing
We chose computer conferencing as the process to integrate
the proposal activities, which lasted four months. We designed the conferencing
and collaboration environment (the electronic, virtual workspace) to achieve
the following.
-
Enable cross-functional collaboration amongst the ten specialist
skill groups comprising the proposal team (e.g. Project Management Group,
Technology Groups, Training Group, Work Process Group, etc.), allied account
teams, and (our) partner companies.
-
Demonstrate to the customer that conferencing would support
concurrent development (in their context, development of an aircraft, in
our immediate context, development of a proposal) in an extremely compressed
timeframe.
-
Co-ordinate a team activity which was geographically distributed
and reduce the cost and inconvenience of contributors' travel to the proposal
HQ. (Only about 25% of the team ever traveled to the proposal HQ and we
calculated that the electronic workspace saved approximately $150,000 in
travel costs.)
Arrangements for computer conferencing were specifically
designed and implemented to support these goals in accordance with principles
and protocols for managing distributed online work, structuring conferences,
and creating appropriate user expectations and behaviors.
If you had looked at the electronic workspace at the height
of the proposal development, you would have seen:
-
On the Project Manager's instruction and example, over 90%
of the team's communication was taking place within computer conferences,
or copied into the computer conferences. Person-to-person email within
the team was restricted to exceptional circumstances.
-
Everyone was using the overall Project Management computer
conference, in which all major events, positions and issues were reported,
as well as all notes of meetings with people in the computer or the customer
company.
-
Each of the ten skill groups was working virtually within
its own computer conference but browsing other groups' conferences.
-
Members of each skill group were cross-posting notes they
felt they were important to other groups' conferences.
-
Material from all conferences was being used to create the
emerging proposal document.
3.2.2.2 Concurrent use of knowledge
What we helped to create for this proposal was a system for
concurrent knowledge management.
-
The team generating the knowledge was the team that used
the knowledge in their work, managing it as they went (borrowing terminology
from electronic publishing, the team was the "prosumer" (producer and consumer)
of its knowledge).
-
Specialist knowledge from within the ten skill groups was
created by individuals, from their individual locations across the USA
and Europe, and shared concurrently with the rest of their group and the
team as a whole.
-
That knowledge was immediately reviewed and applied within
the particular skill group and was available for impact assessment across
the whole team.
-
Discussions about how to proceed at critical points was team-wide,
and final decisions were recorded for all to read.
However, no-one on the team would have recognized the term
"knowledge management" at the time. There was no concern about the specter
of "knowledge sharing", since they needed to share knowledge to get the
work done. All they knew was that the electronic workspace helped them
progress their work and remain connected to their colleagues, without continually
having to travel.
3.2.2.3 Later re-use of knowledge
What happened after the proposal was submitted is a telling
story. Senior management created a task force (mostly of people not previously
involved) to take the final proposal document and genericize it into a
proposal template for aerospace bids - similar to the process of documenting
methodology discussed earlier.
This was not a success. The resulting document was more
of a testament to the efficiency of the Replace All word processor function
than an item of usable intellectual capital. The result of the proposal
work was still there, but it was not on its own accessible. It contained
little context for the proposal (which in fact had a two year history);
its structure was set for the original customer and could not be made generic
without losing its logic; and nothing in it gave any clue as to why the
team had chosen any of the solutions they proposed.
Soon after, however, we ourselves became involved in an
engagement with another aerospace customer, this time in Europe, as part
of a team proposing the means by which online work could support a concurrent
development strategy. One of the first things we did was to open the computer
conferencing archive that had been created by the earlier proposal team.
The following happened:
-
The new team read the conferences. They understood not only
the details of the proposal the original team had created, but why they
had done it, and what went on while they were doing it. From the captured
dialogue they could identify with the decisions, the dialogue, and the
emotions that were flowing at critical points.
-
They were able to abstract key points from the captured process
of the earlier proposal. These were both points that they already knew
they needed answers to, and also points they didn't know they needed answers
to.
-
They were able to contact people whose expertise was apparent
from the recorded conferences, and consult with them about the new proposal.
-
They were able to place the genericized aerospace proposal
template in context, and were able skillfully to pick and modify items
which were relevant to their proposal.
4. Managing team knowledge through computer conferencing
In the preceding section we contrasted the traditional approach
to team knowledge management with a computer-mediated approach, illustrated
by a case example. We have also indicated the importance of computer conferencing
in team computer-mediated knowledge management. In contrast to teams using
the telephone, audio conferencing, video conferencing or even email, teams
using computer conferencing create a permanent shared record of all their
communications. We can predict that soon these records will not just be
text and word-processor or graphic files, but also video and audio clips.
In this section we look more closely at two aspects of
computer conferencing as a knowledge management tool. We look first at
how computer conferencing conveys context and structure. We then look at
the issue of one team using a computer conference structured according
to a previous team's view of its knowledge.
4.1 Context
Context is important to knowledge management because knowledge
is highly contextual. Context binds messages and pieces of information
together to form meaning and thus provides infill to a map or body of knowledge.
It includes situations, relationships, assumptions, expectations and prior
events. We might say that adding context to information is one of the transformations
from information to knowledge.
One of the great advantages of computer conferencing as
a knowledge management process is that it superbly retains context. Within
its major structuring by subject, a computer conference lays out in chronological
sequence the history of a project or program - providing excellent clues
as to what is going on or what went on, in the words that people used as
part of their work. No other communication tool conveys the context of
communication as well as computer conferencing.
4.2 Structure
4.2.1 Structuring of knowledge by the team that created it
As a team creates and populates its own computer conferences,
emergent knowledge is placed within a structure of its own making. That
structure - the mapping of subject-matters to conferences and groups -
is designed at the outset to reflect the team's intended work, and is continually
iterated. Assuming that the team is alive to the need to design and re-design
its electronic workspace, the structure of the team's computer conferences
is by definition always a good approximation to the structure of the team's
knowledge.
4.2.2 Structuring of knowledge for later teams
While computer conferencing creates the requisite knowledge
structure of and for a team which is using its own conferences (as "prosumers"),
that structure need not necessarily be suitable for any later team or individual
("consumers") who want to learn from those conferences. Hence a knowledge
management strategy based on computer conferencing needs to address the
issue of the later re-use of conference records by people with a different
viewpoint.
For example, in the aerospace proposal described earlier,
the team proposed that the client use the computer company's established
phase review process. The way in which the phase review process would be
applied was discussed in a number of the conferences, since it was applicable
to a number of different aspects of the proposal. There was no one conference
called "phase review process". Hence someone interested in learning how
the phase review process was presented in this proposal would not have
found that laid out in one conference, and would have to browse all the
conferences to find mention of it.
4.2.3 Hyperlinked structures
We believe that the answer to the re-structuring of knowledge
in computer conference records is hyperlinking. In order to make the knowledge
base that a computer conference record represents accessible to an unknown
variety of future viewpoints, the content of the computer conference should
be hyperlinked: that is, turned into a web of knowledge.
Hypermedia protocols are now widely available in HTML
tools, and these allow the creation of new links across the content of
computer conference records. The fact that these tools may also permit
the publishing of those records on internal networks serves to increase
their utility in sharing knowledge within an enterprise. It may also be
that those computer conferences are in fact web conferences (conferences
run on intranets), increasing the ease of sharing the conference record.
Specifically, therefore, we believe that in order to make
computer conferences reusable as knowledge bases for later study, an important
task is to identify the substantive items of content in computer conference
records, and link them together. That knowledge base should then allow
the following views to be taken of it:
-
the original view, reflecting the original team's structure
- which includes a chronological view of communication within conferences,
plus
-
a hyperlinked, web view, allowing navigation to conference
items which address the same subject-matter.
Through this hyperlinked structure, the later reader wishing
to learn how the previous team dealt with a particular subject may serendipitously
find that it is already the subject of a conference, but may alternatively
have access to a set of hyperlinked messages within separate conferences.
Once the user has alighted on an item linked as relevant to a particular
subject-matter, the conference record has preserved the context of that
note. That is, rather than being presented with a bewildering array of
mentions of a particular subject, the user has the opportunity to understand
the context in which each item was written.
We recognize that it may not be necessary to go to the
lengths of hyperlinking in every case. There may be sufficient commonality
of knowledge structure throughout an enterprise that computer conferences
generated by one team can be used by others without re- structuring into
a web. However, if that is not the case, then hyperlinking conference records
is a relatively simple and cost-effective process for knowledge management.
4.2.4 Hyperlinking policies and skills
Enterprises will need to create appropriate policies if what
people write to their team colleagues is made available enterprise-wide.
Further, best practices will need to be developed to hyperlink and edit
conference records (giving rise to such questions as who does the hyperlinking,
and what material can safely be edited out). Policies and practices for
hyperlinking are under development by the authors for the WORKING
BY WIRE
program.
5. Team knowledge management and Working by Wire
From our experience with projects such as those recounted
in this paper, we have developed the WORKING BY WIRE
program. Within this program, we interact with users online, helping them
to migrate to online work. We help them design their online work processes
and the online workspace. And we further help users understand and overcome
the psychological and cultural barriers they may be facing in working online,
working online in teams, utilizing knowledge and sharing knowledge with
others.
WORKING BY WIRE
creates the environment and competencies for effective distributed team
work. WORKING BY WIRE
is at the same time a powerful intervention for enterprises who are concerned
with knowledge management. If a team's knowledge is to be managed and shared
within a computer network or intranet, then the bottom line is that there
needs to be some process to get a team's knowledge into the computer in
the first place. WORKING BY WIRE
greatly assists that process. It helps to ensure that
-
everyone on the team uses computer-mediated communications,
-
all their team dialogue takes place in the team electronic
workspace, and not through private email, even when that dialogue is informal,
-
a culture is formed online which reinforces knowledge sharing
and continuous communication,
-
team members are encouraged to learn from each other and
from outside the team,
-
the structure of that electronic workspace remains tuned
to the emerging structure of the knowledge that the team is handling.
Hence WORKING BY WIRE
addresses the issues of knowledge management head-on, providing sound design
and operational bases for both concurrent and later use of knowledge.
-
When a team's knowledge is being used concurrently by its
own members, wherever they are located, WORKING BY
WIRE helps
teams:
-
capture their knowledge
-
organize their knowledge
-
distribute / share their knowledge
-
apply their knowledge to their work
-
When a team's knowledge is being used by a later team or
set of individuals, WORKING BY WIRE
helps:
-
capture knowledge from previous teams
-
reorganize the knowledge for their own viewpoint
-
distribute / access the knowledge in archival conferences
-
apply the knowledge to their own work.
WORKING BY WIRE
is an essential part of an enterprise's knowledge management strategy.
Through equipping people with the competencies and skills for online work,
it allows distributed teams to accelerate their online work and achieve
their goals. A significant part of this is enabling the team to manage
its knowledge for its own concurrent use. A team adhering to WORKING
BY WIRE
principles will also create, in the stored record of its communications,
the knowledge which can be made available to later teams and individuals.
6. References
1. Agile Networking: Competing Through the Internet
and Intranets by George Metes, John Gundry and Paul Bradish.
Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River, NJ., 1997
2. The Wisdom of Teams by J. R. Katzenbach and
D. K. Smith. Harvard Business School Press, MA., 1993
7. About the authors
Comments and inquires regarding this paper are welcomed.
Please contact either of us.
Dr John Gundry is Director of Knowledge Ability Ltd, a
UK-based company that provides international training and consulting on
virtual work, communication and learning. Co-ordinates are email: gundry@knowab.co.uk
phone: +44 1666 824644
Dr George Metes is Director of Business Consulting for Virtual
Learning Systems, Inc., a US company that provides international training
and consulting on virtual teaming and learning. Email: geo92@aol.com
Drs George Metes and John Gundry, with Paul Bradish, are
the authors of Agile Networking: Competing Through the Internet and
Intranets. More information about this book is given on http://www.knowab.co.uk/an-wbw
Knowledge Ability Ltd provides Knowledge Management consulting,
an introduction to which is given at http://www.knowab.co.uk/km
Knowledge Ability Ltd and Virtual Learning Systems Inc.
jointly offer the WORKING BY WIRE
training and consulting program on virtual work and virtual teaming, viewable
at http://www.knowab.co.uk/wbw
8. Notices
Working by Wire is a registered service mark of Virtual Learning
Systems, Inc., and a trademark of Knowledge Ability Ltd.
This paper is copyright © Knowledge Ability Ltd 1996,
1997, 1998 and copyright © Virtual Learning Systems Inc., 1996, 1997,
1998. All Rights Reserved.
Permission is granted to copy and distribute this paper
provided that it is copied and distributed unaltered and entire, including
this entire Section 8, 'Notices'. No permission is granted to exploit the
information in this paper for any commercial purpose whatsoever.
The information in this paper may contain errors. This
paper does not constitute an offer or sample. Neither Knowledge Ability
Ltd or Virtual Learning Systems Inc. warrant the accuracy of the information
in this paper. This paper is provided "as is" without express or implied
warranty.
Version 1.4 February 1999
To Working by WireWhite
Papers page | To Knowledge
Ability's Knowledge Management page