Mckinsey and

Company
Managing Knowledge
Presented by Groupand Learning case study analysis
2
ABHAY SINGH 2018IPM001
HIMANSHI GUPTA 2021PGP146
BIPRADIP CHATTERJEE 2021PGP088
SWAPNIL ARUN 2021PGP401
SOMYA GUPTA 2021PGP379
 McKinsey and Company
background
McKinsey and Company is a multi-billion dollar consulting corporation,
it has 3,800 consultants in 69 locations globally
It has long had a reputation as an employer of choice for the best
and brightest MBA graduates. Clients engaged McKinsey and
Company expecting cutting-edge information to help them make
decisions.
McKinsey views itself as a knowledge provider to Fortune 500 firms.
According to former MD Rajat Gupta, McKinsey is a leader in
knowledge, knowledge growth, & knowledge investments. In spite of
this, the corporation has failed to build a culture that encourages the
creation, preservation, and sharing of knowledge.
Marvin Bower, the company's first managing partner, urged the
business to organize and conduct itself like an elite legal practice,
focusing on intellectual talent and professional integrity.
McKinsey has always focused on strategies to help its consultants
analyze and solve business challenges. A method for educating
consultants to study business problems sequentially—goals, strategy,
policies, organization, facilities, procedures, and personnel—was
devised by its originator, James McKinsey.
McKinsey & Company wanted to give cutting-edge expertise to
its clients but had no way of monitoring their progress.
Employees were not adequately trained for the new McKinsey
and Company direction.
The vast number of people and offices McKinsey controlled
hampered its global operations. In essence, McKinsey and Company
had become too big for its own good.
 Organizational changes intended to facilitate knowledge
creation and sharing

Beginning in the 1970s, the The business also Specialist consultants were
business made structural employed also formed by the
and organizational practise business. Most McKinsey
adjustments to improve consultants were T-shaped
coordinators to
service quality in a more because they were
assist
competitive market. The generalists who also
consultants
business formed Clientele developed an industry or
discover material
Sectors based on industry, functional knowledge
in new
and Centers of Competence emphasis, while specialised
knowledge
based on management consultants were I-shaped
databases. because they concentrated
consulting competence such
as strategy, change on establishing deep
management, and expertise in a specific
marketing area.
 Decade of
Doubt
The business conducted three official investigations into internal
knowledge acquisition, organization, and sharing. It organized a
Commission on Firm Aims and Goals (1971 Commission) to review the
situation following fast development in the US and worldwide. The
1971 Commission stated that although its consultants were often
effective generalist problem solvers, they frequently lacked the deep
industry expertise or substantial specialized experience that
customers demanded.
After being elected MD in 1988,Fred Gluck organized a Client Impact
Committee to explore how McKinsey might use its growing expertise to
achieve demonstrable benefits for each client project. Rather than ad
hoc “engagement teams” that dissolved when the project was over, this
Committee suggested long-standing “client service teams”.
There were concerns within the partnership regarding a progressive
drop in associate engagement in intellectual capital creation.
 Implementing knowledge
McKinsey'smanagement
knowledge management efforts were structural and
functional, and they were executed over decades by the committees or
managing directors. These included:

Internal market evaluation of new ideas by consultants, who

generated two-page summaries of new ideas and disseminated
them firmwide .
The aforementioned structural adjustments grouped consultants
into industry-based Clientele Sectors and formed Centers of
Competence to build functional knowledge. These were ultimately
unified into seven sectors and seven functional competence
groupings.
It was an enhancement and improvement of an existing database
known as the Firm Practice Information System (FPIS). FPIS had
client interaction data; PDNet was meant to gather tacit knowledge
not previously structured
 Managing
Refining Knowledge
Management:
Success
Client Impact
Developing Multiple Career
Paths

Clientele and Engagement Teams: Professional Personnel Committee

Professional Assembled to deliver a created two career paths for client
Development three or four-month service support and
Committee. Objective assignment for a administrative staff. The first for
of replacing the client. practice- dedicated specialists
leader- driven Highly efficient and who built credibility with clients
knowledge flexible unit. Focused on and CSTs through their specialized
creation and immediate task rather knowledge and its expert
dissemination process than long term need application. Second option was
with a "steward Client Service Team: Add practice management track for
model" long term value and practice coordinators, who had a
of self-governing increase the effectiveness key role in transferring knowledge
practices focused on of individual and in helping practice leaders
competence engagements manage increasingly complex
building networks
 Knowledge Management on the
Front
Jeff Peters and the Sydney Assignment

Challenges
Industry expertise "conflicted out"
Resources were unavailable due to timing in Australia

Resolved
20% of consultants hired for the project were inter-office
loans Internal specialists were assembled to consult the team
Utilised the KRD, FPIS and PDNet resources
 Knowledge Management on the
Front
Warwick Bray and European Telecoms

Warwick Bray was an "I" specialist and was overwhelmed by

demands for help
Leveraged the practice coordinator, creating development
and growth
Practice development documentation is created by individual
associates who would step back after several engagements and
write a paper on their new insights.
It was a new generation of practice leadership
attract the best associates
developed a consistent pool of specialists
 Knowledge Management on the
Front
Stephen Dull

Turn that frown upside down

McKinsey focused on client personal relationships, whereas Dull
was more focused on industrial marketing

this led to Dull focusing on a B2B strategy

GDL decided that 20-25% should be functioning experts
Dull's new center was successful and had new options available to
him
Writing a book
Enhance internal credibility and external visibility
 Lessons from McKinsey’s Knowledge Management
Approach
Leadership Support Cultures Motivational Technological
& Changes Foundation
Leadership support is crucial
Incentives Using just internal A strong
for knowledge management,
a vital
Culture and role in knowledge management technological
foundation is
especially when major
an organization's
incentives play evaluation may not be required for successful
change are
knowledge
management performance. ideal. McKinsey knowledge
management.
structura s
McKinsey's specialt conducted large-scale
multiple as Although the
l is well known that
It
consultant as ywell examinations of how it in technological aspect of
involved. is
McKinsey in the
s, anyone engaged utilised and disseminated McKinsey‘s knowledge
knowledgeThe fact that
knowledge management, information, as if management
focus was not
of Bartlett‘s
business.
managing McKinsey's
directors had no obvious paths to consulting itself. case
a
study, Project Coolka
continually pushed knowledge Despite
success at the business. its significant knowledge reveale that t
management projects and
The outcome was poor it was , to d
technological the
that genuine authority
morale
among unable
essential effect
cultural infrastructure had
backed the
committee's knowledge
knowledge management motivationa or changes. been
neglected at
management
professionals who were l
outsider's view Anmay McKinsey, weakening its
recommendations
not contributing the value have
revealed its internal initiatives.
undoubtedly contributed to its
they were capable of. assessments'
success.
flaws.
THANK
YOU