The Tenth AUC Research ConferenceImpact of Information Technology on Education and Research April 6 - 7, 2003

The House of Knowledge Management in AcademicLibraries

Dr. A.W. Labib1* and Dr. Aida Nosseir2

1Senior Lecturer, Manufacturing Division, Department of Mechanical, Aerospace, and Manufacturing Engineering, University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology (UMIST), PO Box 88, Manchester M60 1QD, UK.2 Director of National and Middle Eastern Services, Libraries and Learning Technologies. American University in Cairo, Kasr El Aini Street, Cairo, Egypt*To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: ashraf.labib@umist.ac.uk, fax. 44-161-200 3803.

Abstract: In this paper, an engineering concept called QualityFunction Deployment (QFD) together with itsimplementation model – The House of Quality - are appliedinto the development of a model for knowledge managementfor academic libraries.

In this paper, a methodology coined by the authors as theHouse of Management in Academic Libraries is proposed forselection of appropriate policies that are embodied inthe development of a comprehensive knowledge managementframework in order to assess technologies and systems andtheir role in improving knowledge management. The overalloutcome of this paper is that it shows that the conceptof the House of Management has a great potential inplanning an appropriate, and adaptive, policy forAcademic Libraries.

Introduction:According to Hauser and Clausing (1988), the House ofQuality originated in 1972 at Mitsubishi’s Kobe shipyardsite. The Japanese manufacturers have used itsuccessfully and they used it in services as well asmanufacturing. The foundation of the House of Quality isthe belief that products/services should be designed toreflect customers’ / users’ desires and tastes.

1

The Tenth AUC Research ConferenceImpact of Information Technology on Education and Research April 6 - 7, 2003

Quality Function Deployemnet (QFD) is a method forstructured product/service planning and development thatenables a development team to specify clearly thecustomer’s wants and needs, and then to evaluate eachproposed product or service capability systematically interms of its impact meeting those needs (Cohen, L, 1995).The QFD process involves the construction of one or morematrices (sometimes called “quality tables”). The firstof these matrices is called the “House of Quality” (HOQ).It displays the customer’s wants and needs (the “Voice ofthe Customer” or “What”) along the left, and thedevelopment team’s (“Technical Response” or “Hows”) tomeeting those wants and needs along the top. The matrixconsists of several sections or sub-matrices joinedtogether in various ways, each containing informationrelated to the others. Figure (1) illustrates thedifferent sections of the House of Quality.

Figure (1): The various sections of the House of Quality(HOQ)

Quality Promotion in Academic EducationLibraries as well as colleges and universities are facingmajor transformation change as digital technology

2

The Tenth AUC Research ConferenceImpact of Information Technology on Education and Research April 6 - 7, 2003

fundamentally alters how services are provided, researchis conducted, and learning is enabled (Hawkins, B.L.,2001). For many in the academic world, KnowledgeManagement (KM) is an old concept, a functionhistorically performed by librarians. KM is defined asthe process of transforming information and intellectualassets into enduring value. The key to KM is capturingthe knowledge of process-how organisations get their workdone and of how various elements of information connectto this process.

Much of the writing about KM has focused on competitiveadvantage, on how one firm can have a leveraged positionover another. In the academic world, however, collegialrather than competitive motivations change the nature andthe dynamics of the KM model. Having a larger or morecomprehensive research library have been usedcompetitively to try to attract better faculty, but forthe most part, the culture of higher education is basedon the free flow of information without competitiveconcerns.

According to Aiyepeku, W (2001) KM is arguably thefastest growing component of burgeoning, “big business”knowledge industry which incorporates much of the theoryand practice of library, archives and informationservices.

The challenge is to design a customised, yet flexibleinfrastructure that supports both individual andcollective learning so the academic library can adapt todiscontinuous change in its operating environments.

3

The Tenth AUC Research ConferenceImpact of Information Technology on Education and Research April 6 - 7, 2003

Figure (2): The “User” in higher education

The proposed model in this paper aims to address thischallenge through the development of a model called theHouse of Knowledge Management in Academic Libraries.

The Academic Library and the Continuous Flow ofInformationStratigos (2000) argues that end-users have already begunto see a wider role for the library, less bound bytraditional library functions. The bottom line is thatusers are not asking for better reference services or agood hard copy collection. Rather, they want the librarytoo provide information to their desktops; help withinternal information and experts, alerting services onselecting topics, and high value research services. Frommanagement’s perspective, the library is seen as a sourceof content expertise that can be leveraged in the newintranet.

In the digital era and through the rise of electronicinformation resources, Hawkins (2001) states that thereis no clear and defined role for the followingcategories:

4

The Tenth AUC Research ConferenceImpact of Information Technology on Education and Research April 6 - 7, 2003

1. Librarians with regard to the selection,preservation, and provision of the digital resourcesaccessible through the Net.

2. Students and Faculty need to learn how to evaluatethese information resources, and this is far moredifficult to do with resources on the Web than withthose in a traditional library.

3. Academic departments and even scholars create theirown collections of Web sites , selecting anddescribing network resources they find useful andcredible.

4. Search engines such as Yahoo, Google, and Altavista.Though such services offer much wider coverage thanany traditional cataloguing approach, they do sowith far less quality and filtering and with a verydifferent, often less powerful, level ofdescription. In addition, these search engines arealso tainted by a bias routed in their commercialadvertising relationships.

5. Most (re)searchers do not use – or know how to use –the advanced features and the more sophisticatedsearch algorithms embedded in these applications.

Figure (3) shows the concept of Quality FunctionDeployment (QFD) and its main stakeholders in the contextof the academic library.

5

The Tenth AUC Research ConferenceImpact of Information Technology on Education and Research April 6 - 7, 2003

Figure (3): The concept of QFD and the stakeholders inthe academic library context

The Academic Library and Quality Function DeploymentEnd-users such as students, faculty, researchers,librarians, publishers, authors and reviewers are leftwith the following difficulties:

1. Incomplete information.2. Little if any organisation.3. Rudimentary, inefficient and often inaccurate

searching.4. Validity of information is questioned and not

refereed.

QFD is a structured framework to translate the ‘voice ofthe customer’ into the actions and resource commitmentsneeded to meet customer expectations. This is done bymapping the customer requirements into specific designfeatures (and eventually into manufacturing processes)through one or more matrices of ‘expectation andfulfilment options’. QFD is used as a systematicapproach to both identify and prioritise customerrequirements, and to translate these requirements intoproduct and processes specification. QFD is the

6

The Tenth AUC Research ConferenceImpact of Information Technology on Education and Research April 6 - 7, 2003

converting of customer demands (WHATs) into qualitycharacteristics (QCs) (HOWs), and eventually into processplan and production plan. The problem for the designer or design team is to makethe product specification so as to satisfy what thecustomers want. Normally, customer desires are obtainedthrough a survey conducted by the marketing department,and the output of this is a list of qualitative ‘customerattributes’ (CAs), such as easy to use, resistant ordurable. On the other hand, design specifications arequantitative and based on engineering properties. Thus,conflict can arise between marketing and engineering, asthey speak different languages. A method that helps inmatching those CAs to design specifications and,therefore, improves communication between the differentexperts of a company is needed. The Quality FunctionDeployment (QFD) method serves for this purpose. It isconcerned with the translation of the customer attributes(voice of the customer) into ‘engineeringcharacteristics’ (ECs). These ECs are very closelyrelated to the CAs and are those that the design team canmodify (by setting targets) in order to best satisfy thecustomer. Therefore, this method aims at satisfyingcustomer desires through improving communication betweendepartments and finding appropriate target values foreach EC.

The QFD approach seeks answers to the following sevenquestions:

- (What) Voice of the customer. What do our customersneed and want?

- (How) Voice of the Engineer. What technical measuresrelate to our customers’ needs?

- (How Much) Cost and target Values. What are theobjective values to be achieved?

- (Correlation Matrix). What are the relationshipsbetween the voice of the customer and the voice ofthe engineer?

- (Competitive analysis). In terms of our customers,how well are we doing relative to our competitors?

7

The Tenth AUC Research ConferenceImpact of Information Technology on Education and Research April 6 - 7, 2003

- Technical comparison. How does our product orservice performance compare to our competition?

- Trade-offs (Prioritisation). What are the potentialtechnical trade-offs?

Figures (4) and (5) demonstrates two simple examples ofcustomer requirements and technical solutions that canfulfil those requirements in academic libraries.

Figure (4): An example of academic library customerrequirements versus technical solutions that can satisfythose requirements.

8

The Tenth AUC Research ConferenceImpact of Information Technology on Education and Research April 6 - 7, 2003

Figure (5): An example of academic library customerrequirements versus technical solutions that can satisfythose requirements.

Case Studies related to academic libraries

The following example demonstrates how customerrequirements were fulfilled in an academic libraryapplication as quoted by Levine (2001). Results from aproject from the University of Zagreb which developed a“Digital Collection for Blind and Visually ImpairedPeople” and which supports the 5,500 citizens in Croatiaand is now operated with the cooperation of the CroatianAssociation for the Blind and Croatian Library for theBlind. This project includes voice output and copyrightissues. The project features copyright-free full-text, e-books in Croatian, mailing lists for the blind, and linksto serial publications and magazines for the blind. Theproject provides blind university students withliterature to support their studies and examinations.Primarily library and information science studentsconceived this project.

9

The Tenth AUC Research ConferenceImpact of Information Technology on Education and Research April 6 - 7, 2003

The authors of this research paper have developed theHouse of Quality to demonstrate how it can be applied tosatisfying the needs of blind and visual impairedresearchers as shown in Figure (6).

Figure (6): The House of Quality and relationshipsapplied to the needs of blind and visual impairedresearchers.

In the House of Quality (HOQ), the “Whats” aretransformed to “Hows” in subsequent matrices as shownin Figure (7). This allows a more detailed analysis ofactions where producers become customers in subsequentlevels of the HOQ model.

10

The Tenth AUC Research ConferenceImpact of Information Technology on Education and Research April 6 - 7, 2003

Figure (7): Diagrammatic representation of “What toHow” translations

To illustrate the concept of translations of “Whats toHows” in the academic libraries, the model in Figure(8) shows phases of QFD in academic libraryapplication.

11

The Tenth AUC Research ConferenceImpact of Information Technology on Education and Research April 6 - 7, 2003

Figure (8): Phases of QFD in academic libraryapplication

DiscussionThe strength of the House of Knowledge Management is thatit enforces efficient information sharing by creating adisciplined outline. This, in turn, enhancesimplementation of maintenance policies. The benefits canbe categorised into the following generic areas:Knowledge-base.Training and Communication.Planning & Development.Integration.

Knowledge-baseThe knowledge base developed from such a model enhancesdecision-making. Knowledge can be preserved in oneconcise place, in contrast to unruly design-standardsmanuals. The matrices and charts prepared during theprocedure create a working document that can be easilyreferenced and learned from. The knowledge-base holdsgreat promise for future decision making efforts. Itholds the answers to questions concerning what decisions

12

The Tenth AUC Research ConferenceImpact of Information Technology on Education and Research April 6 - 7, 2003

were made and why and can simplify similar decision-making endeavours.

Training and CommunicationIn addition, the developed model can be used to trainentry-level practitioners. By reviewing the results ofsuccessful projects, entry-level practitioners beginhigher up on the learning curve. The main strength isthat the process itself becomes a catalyst that generatesteam effort and cooperation. The model then becomes amechanism for communication among the various areasworking on the project.

Planning & DevelopmentThe model not only focuses the attention to knowledgemanagement requirements from different businessfunctions, it also provides a mechanism to targetselected areas where gains could help improve competitiveadvantages – areas with undeveloped potential. Theproposed model lays the foundation for future work – youdon’t have to continually reinvent the wheel or wonderhow you did it last time. It also provides a neededdiscipline, much like a pilot’s checklist. An avionicsengineer may have flown 300 missions, but he still checksoff every instrument when he gets into the cockpit. Themodel prioritises products and technologiescharacteristics and highlights areas requiring furtheranalysis.

Integration The House of Knowledge Management can be thought of asthe glue that binds the various policies together: Bytying different activities together, it providesintegration of the various functions. The model is ofgreatest benefit when applied to complex systems that donot lend themselves to such traditional approaches asrule-based design.

13

The Tenth AUC Research ConferenceImpact of Information Technology on Education and Research April 6 - 7, 2003

References1. Aiyepeku, W.(2001).Grafting marketable KM skills

into education for information in Africa. Educationfor information.Vol.19, Issue 1, p12. 15p.

2. Akao, Yoji (1990). Quality Function Deployment:integrating customer requirements into productdesign, by Yoji Akao; translated by Glenn H. Mazur.Oregon, Productivity Press. 369p.

3. Cohen, Lou (1995). Quality Function Deployment: howto make QFD work for you. California, Addison –Wasley. 348p.

4. Hauser, J. & Clausing, D. (1988). The House ofQuality. Harvard Review, May - June. Pp63-73.

5. Hawkins, B. (2001). Information access in thedigital era: challenges and a call forcollaboration. Educause Review, Sept. – Oct., Vol.36, Issue 5, p50, 8p.

6. Lancaster, F.W. (1993). If you want to evaluate yourlibrary. 2nd.ed. Champaign, IL University ofIllinois, Graduate School of Library and InformationScience, 1993. 352p.

7. Levine, Emile (2001). Libraries in the digital age.Information today. Sept., Vol. 18, Issue 8, p56. 2p.

8. Rogers, M. and Order, N. (2000), Research librariansseek to build scholarly e-communities. LibraryJournal. June, Vol. 125, Issue 11, p12.3p.

9. Stratigos, A. (2001). Industry insights. On Line,Nov. – Dec., Vol. 24, Issue 6, p67, 4p.

10. Vanegas, and A.W. Labib, “A FQFD model forderiving optimum targets”, International Journal ofProduction Research (IJPR), Vol 39, No 1, pp 99-120,2001.

14