PROOF ONLY. Exploring Management Consulting Firms as Knowledge Systems

881 Authors name Exploring Management Consulting Firms as Knowledge Systems Andreas Werr and Torbjörn Stjernberg Andreas Werr Stockholm School of Economics, Sweden Torbjörn Stjernberg Gothenburg University, Sweden Organization Studies 24(6): 881 908 Copyright 2003 SAGE Publications (London, Thousand Oaks, CA & New Delhi) Abstract This article examines the nature and the generation, dissemination and translation of knowledge in large, global management consulting organizations. The knowledge system in consulting organizations is modelled as consisting of three interacting knowledge elements: methods and tools, providing a common language and knowledge structure; cases, carrying knowledge in a narrative form; and the experience of individual consultants that is essential for the adaptation of methods, tools and cases to the specific consulting project. A number of recent studies have characterized knowledge-management strategies as focusing on either articulate knowledge or tacit knowledge. We argue that a fruitful understanding of knowledge management in management consulting requires attention to the relations between the different elements that represent different kinds of knowledge. Based on case studies in Andersen Consulting (now Accenture) and Ernst & Young Management Consulting (now Cap Gemini Ernst & Young) these knowledge elements and the interplay between them are identified and analysed. The main role of articulate knowledge is not to replace experience, but rather to support the generation, dissemination and use of it. A number of consequences of this conceptualization of the knowledge system are discussed in terms of the ability of the knowledge system to generate different types of learning and the complementarity of structural and individual knowledge. Keywords: professional service firms, knowledge system, management consulting, consulting methods Introduction Global management consulting companies are commonly discussed as the archetype of knowledge-intensive firms (Alvesson 1993, 1995; Starbuck 1992). Similarly, the literature on knowledge management draws extensively on examples from the management consulting industry (Empson 2001b; Hansen 1999; Morris 2001; Sarvary 1999), and an increasing amount of literature on the potential and challenges of knowledge management in management consulting is emerging (Bartlett 1996; Chard 1997; Davenport and Hansen 1998; Dunford 2000; Martiny 1998). The knowledge-intensive character of the management consulting industry is further discussed by studies that point to the role of management consultants as knowledge brokers between their client organizations (Bessant and Rush www.sagepublications.com 0170-8406[200307]24:6;881 908;033794

882 Organization Studies 24(6) 1995; Hargadon 1998; Sahlin-Andersson 1996) and in the production of management knowledge (Furusten 1995; Suddaby and Greenwood 2001). Further, knowledge is suggested to be one of the main forces driving the recent restructuring of the consulting industry toward an increased concentration of large, global management consulting organizations (Kipping and Scheybani 1994; Sarvary 1999). In spite of this focus on knowledge in the context of management consulting companies our current understanding of this knowledge and how it is managed is quite crude, and a more empirically based discussion of knowledge in management consulting has been called for (see, for example, Kipping and Armbrüster 1998; Morris 2001; Salaman 2002). Our current understanding of knowledge management in management consulting organizations is to a large extent characterized by a polarization with respect to the character of organizational knowledge. Current conceptions of organizational knowledge often describe this as dominated by either articulate knowledge, as represented by documents, databases, and so on, or by tacit knowledge, as ingrained in the brains of the organization s members (Hansen and Haas 2001; Hansen et al. 1999; Sarvary 1999). However, studies of the use of structured methods in management consulting companies by the authors have previously indicated a potential complementarity between explicit knowledge, in the form of methods, tools, and cases, and personal and tacit knowledge, in the form of the consultants ingrained experience, in the generation, dissemination and application of knowledge (see Werr et al. 1997). Such a complementarity of tacit and articulate knowledge has also been pointed out in other areas, such as that of organizational knowledge creation (Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995), and in studies of the knowledge of professionals (for example. Polanyi 1967; Schön 1983), but has yet to be explored in the context of management consulting organizations or professional service firms more generally. Against this background, the current article develops a model of the knowledge system in management consulting companies that focuses on the complementary character of tacit and explicit organizational knowledge. Based on qualitative studies in the Swedish branches of two global consultancies, it is argued that the simultaneous existence and complementary use of the two knowledge types represent the core of organizational competence in management consulting. The article is divided into three main parts. The first part outlines perspectives on organizational knowledge in general and on knowledge in management consulting specifically, in order to provide a background and framework for the study. Following this introduction of theoretical concepts, the second part of the article is dedicated to our empirical studies of the knowledge systems in two global consulting companies. After a description of our methodological approach, three basic knowledge elements (methods and tools, cases, and experience) are described as recurring sources of knowledge in the consultants work and, thus, as the main elements of the organizational knowledge system. Following the description of these knowledge elements, their interrelations are explored and it is proposed that

Werr & Stjernberg: Exploring Management Consulting Firms 883 organizational knowledge can be fruitfully understood as the interplay between the three knowledge elements identified. In the third and final part of the article, the conceptualization of the knowledge system is discussed, and its consequences in relation to issues of organizational learning and knowledge creation are explored. In the study of management consulting and the management consulting industry, the heterogeneity of the industry and the consulting task have often been neglected (Fincham 1999). This calls for an empirical positioning of our study. The main focus of this article is large, global consultancies, which often act toward the expert end of the expert process consulting continuum (Greiner and Metzger 1983). The projects studied as a basis for the article focused on the re-engineering of business processes and mainly put the consultant in a role of method support, guiding the client organization s analysis work as well as providing expert input in designing solutions. It is also in this part of the industry that growth has been most rapid in the past decade (Suddaby and Greenwood 2001). Knowledge in Management Consulting: Theoretical or Practical? The theoretical field dealing with the character of organizational knowledge is vast, ranging over multiple disciplines (Easterby-Smith 1997; Easterby- Smith et al. 1998). In the following section, we focus on two opposing views that build on fundamentally different assumptions as to the character and handling of organizational knowledge (see also Empson 2001a). The first view, which focuses on knowledge as theory, is represented by the traditional knowledge-management literature. The second focuses on knowledge as practice and is represented by the literature on communities of practice as a way of understanding knowledge in organizations. Approaches that integrate these two perspectives are the focus of a third subsection. Knowledge as Theory The knowledge as theory perspective views knowledge as mainly articulate or possible to articulate. It is assumed that knowledge can be detached from a specific actor and situation and made available to others by means of written or spoken language. This view of knowledge also cherishes abstract knowledge that represents general truths that hold beyond a specific situation. Given this conception of knowledge, the acquisition, maintenance and accumulation of knowledge is a question of logical deduction and formal study. For the individual, it is about learning the relevant theories of a specific field. On an organizational level, it is about identifying relevant knowledge and synthesizing it into generally applicable theories and methods. In this context, the organizational challenge is, therefore, to identify the best knowledge to synthesize as well as to motivate employees to take part in this process of synthesis by submitting their articulate knowledge to the rest of the organization (Dunford 2000).

884 Organization Studies 24(6) Once formulated and made available to the organization (for example, in a database), the dissemination of knowledge is, in principle, unproblematic, as the knowledge can be understood and shared without a knowing subject. Thus, the challenge is to extract the right information from the knowledge databases as well as to motivate people to apply the abstract and articulate knowledge, such as methods and tools, rather than have them reinvent the wheel (Dunford 2000). The view described above is to a large extent represented by the more practitioner-oriented literature on knowledge management, and underlies many of the knowledge-management initiatives, for example, in consulting organizations (Chard 1997; Davenport and Hansen 1998; March 1997; Martiny 1998). Knowledge as Practice An alternative perspective views knowledge as practice, where abstract and articulate knowledge is always applied in a specific situation and requires a knowing subject who can translate (Czarniawska and Joerges 1996) this knowledge. Here, it is argued that knowledge does not exist as separate from its use. The people who share practice and experience may be seen as a community linked through this practice. In this context, knowledge is mainly regarded as tacit and situated. This also implies a certain scepticism toward general knowledge, which is argued to obscure the true, local character of knowledge in action (Brown and Duguid 1991; Schön 1983; Tsoukas 1996). According to this perspective, knowledge is generated, maintained and accumulated through action in a specific context. Learning is in the doing. As this practical knowledge is tightly linked to a specific context and person, its accumulation is dependent on individual actors. Rather than accumulating knowledge in organizational databases, accumulation implies continual development of shared understandings among a group of actors sharing a practice (Cook and Yanow 1996). Disseminating this mainly tacit and specific knowledge can occur through social interaction in the doing or through storytelling within a community of practice. In storytelling, narratives illustrate norms about how to function in the community. The appropriation of knowledge is also tightly linked to action it is about involving newcomers in the ongoing work and problemsolving processes (Lave and Wenger 1991). Managing knowledge in this system thus involves acknowledging the communities and giving them freedom of action rather than making them conform with canonical practice as expressed in the organization s methods, procedures, handbooks, and so on (Brown and Duguid 1991). Knowledge as Theory and Practice The two above-presented perspectives represent opposing views of the nature of organizational competence. Viewing knowledge as theory places organizational competence in organizational methods, tools, manuals, models and other documents accessible through databases and printed media. Viewing

Werr & Stjernberg: Exploring Management Consulting Firms 885 knowledge as practice, on the other hand, places organizational competence in the individuals and the community of which they are a part. From the latter perspective, creating organizational knowledge is mainly a social act aimed at facilitating the interaction between individual knowledge carriers. A limited number of efforts have, however, been made to bridge the divide between the different perspectives on knowledge. These efforts have explored the relations between the theoretical and practical perspectives on organizational knowledge. Hansen et al. (1999) introduce a contingency approach to describe when which of the above perspectives is the most appropriate for managing an organization s knowledge. They argue that viewing knowledge as theory is salient in organizations that work with fairly standardized and repetitive tasks. In situations such as these, knowledge can be articulated, stored and disseminated via databases according to what Hansen et al. (1999) call a codification strategy. Viewing knowledge as practice is more appropriate in organizations aimed at original and creative problem solving, where the focus is placed not so much on the reuse of knowledge, but rather on the generation of new knowledge, which requires interaction between knowledgeable individuals. This demands tacit and situated knowledge and leads to what the authors call a personalization strategy for knowledge management. Ernst & Young and Andersen Consulting (now Accenture) are examples of organizations that use the former strategy, while McKinsey and Bain & Company are presented as users of the latter strategy (Hansen et al. 1999). Similar arguments linking the suitable degree of articulation of knowledge to the standardization of the task carried out are presented by Sarvary (1999) and Morris (2001). However, as argued by Hansen and Haas (2001), the two types of organizational knowledge (articulate versus tacit) may be viewed as complementary rather than alternative. In a study of the links between different forms of knowledge and organizational productivity in a management consulting organization, it is concluded that personalized and codified means of sharing knowledge are complementary in the sense that knowledge transferred by personalized means improves consultants quality of work output, whereas codified knowledge mainly increases work efficiency. In their general theory of organizational knowledge creation, Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) also stress the interaction between articulate and tacit knowledge by pointing out the transitions between tacit and articulate knowledge as central for knowledge creation. The knowledge-creation process is described as a five-phase process involving four modes of knowledge conversion. The process begins with the tacit knowledge of one or several individuals, who share their knowledge with others and thereby develop a common understanding. This common understanding is transformed into explicit knowledge in the form of a concept in the second phase of the process. Through discussion and reflection, tacit knowledge is transformed into explicit knowledge. In the third phase, the emerged concept is justified by comparing and linking it to other explicit knowledge within as well as outside the organization. In the forth phase, the concept is materialized into an

886 Organization Studies 24(6) archetype, such as a prototype or a model operating procedure, that can be further discussed and tested. In the fifth and final stage, the knowledge is cross-levelled, leading to new spirals of knowledge creation elsewhere in the organization. In this process, four modes of knowledge conversion are at work. These are: socialization (transferring tacit knowledge to tacit knowledge), externalization (tacit to explicit), combination (explicit to explicit) and internalization (explicit to tacit). While Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) emphasize a sequential interdependence between tacit and articulate organizational knowledge in the knowledge-creation process, little is said about the functional relations between the two knowledge types, although the existence of such relations does receive a brief mention. When turning to the literature on the nature of individuals professional knowledge, however, a richer picture of the functional relations between tacit and articulate forms of knowledge emerges, highlighting their complementarity at a specific point in time (see, for example, Göranzon 1988; Janik 1988; Josefson 1988, 1992; Polanyi 1967). Here, tacit knowledge is generally viewed as prerequisite for the use of articulate knowledge. It is through tacit knowledge that articulate knowledge is interpreted and brought to use in a specific situation. At the same time, the importance of articulate knowledge as a starting point for acquiring tacit knowledge is emphasized (Dreyfus and Dreyfus 1986; Polanyi 1967). The Knowledge System in Global Consulting Organizations: An Empirical Investigation Methodology As argued in previous sections of this article, the treatment of knowledge management in management consulting, as well as more generally, is to a large extent characterized by a dichotomization with respect to the character of organizational knowledge as either mainly articulate (stored in large databases) or as mainly tacit (stored in the heads of individual consultants). In a pilot study concerning the use of structured methodologies in five consultancies (ABB Mac, Andersen Consulting, BCG, Ernst & Young MC and McKinsey), we identified six functions of methods in the work of management consultants (Werr et al. 1997). These functions concerned both the client organization (facilitating collaboration and knowledge transfer from consultant to client and facilitating the collaboration between client representatives by providing a common framework) and the consulting organization (providing cognitive support to the individual consultant, providing an organizational memory, facilitating experience exchange, and enabling flexible staffing). In the interviews in this pilot study, consultants did not treat their companies methods (articulate knowledge) and their own and colleagues (mainly tacit) experiences as separate entities. Rather, articulate knowledge and tacit knowledge were described as two aspects of the consulting organiz-

Werr & Stjernberg: Exploring Management Consulting Firms 887 ation s knowledge base. The importance of structured and articulate methods, in particular, was pointed out as a way for consultants to make use of their collective (mainly tacit) experience. This thus indicated a need for more elaborate models of the knowledge system in consulting organizations, and given the observations made in the pilot study, a deeper empirical understanding of the actual work of consultants seemed an important point of departure in our effort to create such a model. This study is thus based on a premise that a thorough empirical understanding of a phenomenon may be a suitable point of departure for theorizing (Eisenhardt 1989; Glaser and Strauss 1967; Turner 1981). The data sources underlying the studies on which this article is based are summarized in Table 1. Data for this study was collected in the Swedish subsidiaries of two global management consulting organizations, Ernst & Young, now Cap Gemini Ernst and Young (E&Y), and Anderson Consulting, now Accenture (AC). Data collection in E&Y was closely linked to two consulting projects, both of which had a process reengineering focus. In the first project, four interviews with the project leader were conducted during the four-month duration of the project and 12 project team meetings with the client were observed. The interviews focused on the consultants reflections on the consulting process, perceived problems, planned actions and applied knowledge sources. The second E&Y project was studied with a specific focus on the internal organization and the consultants perceived sources of knowledge in different phases of the project as well as more generally. The project had a hierarchical organization with an experienced project manager and two less experienced sub-project leaders. Table 1 lists the interviews and observations made during this project. Data collection from AC was conducted through interviews in connection with a simulated proposal-writing process. Based on information accessible from a computer on the consultants demand, three consultants with varying years of experience with the company (2 10 years) were asked to draw up a proposal for a process-improvement project. Data on the consultants information search behaviour and verbal protocols (Ericsson and Simon 1984) was collected. Before and after the simulation, a semi-structured, in-depth Table 1 Data Sources Consulting Organization Data Sources Ernst & Young Management Consultants General interviews: 3 consultants, managing partner (3 times), consultant responsible for method development. Project 1: 4 interviews with consultants, observations of 12 project group meetings, 12 client interviews. Project 2: 2 Interviews with the project manager, 3 interviews with sub-project manager, observation of 1 internal planning meeting. Andersen Consulting General interviews: 3 consultants. Simulations: 3 consultants.

888 Organization Studies 24(6) interview was carried out regarding the sources of information used in writing the proposal and possible discrepancies between the laboratory situation and a real-life situation. The design of collecting data from ongoing projects or a simulation to trigger discussion of the use of different kinds of knowledge in the consultants work made it possible to be very specific with respect to the consultants use of knowledge. However, it also imposed a risk that the descriptions of the knowledge system generated in the simulation study would reveal information only about the knowledge available and used in the early phases of a project. In order to reduce this risk, the above-mentioned data was complemented with three additional interviews with consultants with varying levels of experience. The analysis of this diverse data was guided by the study s aim of generating a more elaborate understanding of organizational knowledge in management consulting and was inspired by a grounded theory approach (Glaser and Strauss 1967; Strauss and Corbin 1994; Turner 1981). The data was reviewed with a focus on the consultants mentioning of different sources of knowledge, that is, sources they referred to in order to obtain information and ideas or advice on how to proceed in a specific situation. In this review process, relevant passages from interview protocols and field notes were coded using NVivo software. Text passages perceived as describing similar knowledge sources were coded as the same category (Turner 1981). Through this process, three categories that captured the different knowledge sources mentioned emerged. The three categories were labelled methods and tools, cases, and experience. Once all of the relevant text had been coded, the data passages referring to the different categories were reviewed in order to explore the relations between the three identified categories (Turner 1981). While the trigger for this study was for the most part a conceptual one (to suggest a more elaborate model of the organizational knowledge system in management consulting companies), the cases studied were instrumental in providing the understanding of consulting companies knowledge systems reflected in the model. In the following, we thus include excerpts from the case-study data to illustrate and make vivid the concepts created in the study, as well as their interrelations. A more exhaustive description of the cases may be found in Werr (1999). One challenge in studying the practice of management consulting is to see past the presentational data (Van Maanen 1979) that reflects the image respondents want to convey to the researcher. The image of management consulting organizations as efficient knowledge producers is strong and heavily promoted by the consulting organizations themselves (Bäcklund and Werr 2001), which creates a strong incentive for consultants to conceal from a researcher information which may be at odds with this image. In this study, we have tried to overcome this problem by focusing on the consultants concrete day-to-day activities. By observing consultants in action, and by discussing issues of knowledge creation and use in relation to specific ongoing projects (as in the E&Y case) or a simulation (as in the AC case), we hope to

Werr & Stjernberg: Exploring Management Consulting Firms 889 have reached beyond the official view of how work in the studied organizations is conducted and the kind of knowledge this work is based on. Table 2. The Characteristics of Three Knowledge Elements in Management Consulting Three Basic Knowledge Elements An exploration of the different knowledge sources consultants referred to in planning, designing and carrying out consulting assignments revealed three basic knowledge elements. These were methods and tools, cases, and experience. The characteristics and roles of these knowledge elements are summarized in Table 2 and are described in more detail below. Methods and Tools Both AC and E&Y had a large number of both methods and tools. The consultants recurrently referred to these as a source of knowledge when planning and executing consulting projects. AC consultants mainly referred to their large international toolbox containing both broad methods outlining in detail the activities required, for example, in the execution of re-engineering projects, and more specific tools for tackling a variety of tasks, such as how to design a sales organization, the product-development process or a logistics system in a specific industry. An overall logic for consulting projects within AC was defined by the business integration framework that identified strategy, process, organization and technology as central for understanding and changing a business. In E&Y, the main method referred to was a locally developed adaptation of the global method for carrying out re-engineering projects. This local adaptation was justified since Swedish projects were generally smaller and less complex than US projects. E&Y s method for business process reengineering was also sold to clients, and revenues from these sales to a large extent financed the activities related to continued development of the method. In both E&Y and AC, methods provided the consultants with models, templates and checklists to support and structure their work. The development and maintenance of these methods and tools in both organizations was the responsibility of practising consultants. These consultants recurrently reviewed the activities, applying a specific method or tool in order to identify successful innovations of practices, ideas picked Methods Cases Experience Description General description of a Documents produced in Accumulated experience sequence of activities in the projects, e.g. process maps from practice change process and proposals Kind of knowledge Articulate Articulate Tacit Organizational Organizational Individual Abstract Specific Varying levels of abstraction Characteristics in Widely applicable; easily Limited general applicability, Guides action; hard to the knowledge transferable; seldom a guide but valuable as models when transfer; transfer requires system action in a specific case similar cases are found; extended face-to-face easily transferable interaction

890 Organization Studies 24(6) up from the client organization, or common problems requiring further development. Methods were continuously updated in order to reflect the organization s state-of-the-art approach in different problem areas. Improvements to a method could include the adding or elimination of activities and tools, changing the sequence of activities, altering checklists, and so on. Experiences from ongoing projects could also initiate the development of entirely new methods and tools based on a review of the consultancy s practice in this area. Knowing the method and keeping up-to-date on its development was an implicit requirement in both consulting organizations. Newcomers were sent to courses on the method, and experienced consultants were expected to stay updated with changes in the method. When a new version of the method was released, this was expected to be learned: One tries to stay updated with the new versions of the method. At least one knows where to look in order to access the latest knowledge. (Senior consultant AC) Once learned, however, the role of the method in the consultant s day-today work moved into the background, and was only seldom directly referred to as a guide for action in ongoing projects. In the studied organizations, consultants actions were not directly based on a close study of the method, but rather on an internalized picture of the method, as illustrated by a quote from a junior E&Y consultant: When thinking of the method, you mainly think of the overall working steps, rather than the detailed list of activities. I see the method more as a thought model, with certain recurring steps and basic building blocks one can learn. Once learned, you can build more freely with them. Thus, the actions of consultants were not based on a mechanical application of methods. Rather, a method influenced the work of the consultants via the consultants internalized understanding of the method. This was also illustrated in the proposal-writing experiment carried out with AC consultants. Here, the proposals generated by the consultants differed in how the phases of the proposed project were defined. However, the logic of the proposals, the interpretation of the client s problem, the proposed solutions, and the estimations of resource requirements were similar among AC consultants and differed from those of a set of consultants from a consultancy that used a different method (see Werr 1999). Methods and tools thus provided abstract and generally applicable structures to the overall consulting process and the solving of specific problems, by defining a number of activities and their sequence, as well as central concepts in thinking about a client organization (for example, the business integration model) and the consulting process. This shared structure, though not rigidly adhered to in the consulting process, was referred to by the consultants as an important enabler of their working in project groups that included both senior and junior consultants. Methods made communication between the consultants more effective, as the senior consultants could refer to the method when explaining to their junior colleagues what to do.

Werr & Stjernberg: Exploring Management Consulting Firms 891 The common framework provided by the method in terms of phases, activities, measures, forms, checklists, and so on was further described as an enabler of the communication between consultants, in which knowledge from one individual was made available to another: An important function of the method is to create a common language, so that when I say process model, everybody knows what I mean. This is always important when you want to exchange information rapidly within or between projects. In these cases it is very important that everybody talks the same language. (Senior consultant E&Y) The method used here thus supports the establishment of a shared view of the consultants activities that facilitates collaboration and communication between consultants in projects. The consultants described this collaboration as one of their most important sources of learning and thus as an important arena for the exchange and generation of knowledge. This contribution of methods was made possible by their articulate, organizational and general character, which made them easily accessible throughout the organization as well as applicable in a large number of situations. Cases Documentation produced in previous projects (that is, old cases) provided a second source of knowledge for the consultants in all project phases. When designing a proposal for a new project, the consultants began by consulting the knowledge database to obtain examples of how proposals had been designed in previous similar projects. In later phases of the project, inspiration for formulating meeting agendas or organizational solutions could also be obtained from previous cases: All proposals are stored in the database. Normally, you check existing proposals in similar areas and talk to people who have worked on these projects, follow up how much time the project took etc... Old proposals are reused in quite a few cases, mostly concerning presentation and logic, and to ensure quality. (Senior consultant AC) It was, however, repeatedly pointed out that documents from previous cases could seldom be reused without adaptation. Rather, they served as a point of departure or source of input in the process of creating a specific design or solution for a specific case. Access to the old cases in the organizations studied was facilitated by local and worldwide databases. In the case of E&Y, the worldwide database was divided into two parts. The first was an unfiltered repository of documents produced in client projects. Documents in this database included proposals, process maps, final reports, and so on. The second part of the database contained the best of the best, structured as PowerPacks for different industries (for example, finance and aerospace) and processes (for example, procurement process). These were created and maintained by centres of excellence virtual groups consisting of active consultants with varying levels of experience, responsible for the development of the practice in a specific area of application. The most widely used part of the knowledge database, these PowerPacks contained information specially adapted to different problems and industries. PowerPacks included the firm s best

892 Organization Studies 24(6) products as identified by the consultants responsible for their creation and maintenance. They included documents such as successful proposals, process models, marketing support, educational material, benchmarks, and other deliveries from previous client assignments: [PowerPacks] contain for example different presentations and different agendas for different meetings... They contain adaptations of the method to the requirements of specific processes. You still have to have the method, but when the method says, produce an agenda for the visioning seminar including the following ten items, you can consult the PowerPacks and find ten projects concerning the accounting process and the agendas used in these projects. (Senior consultant E&Y) E&Y s Swedish subsidiary also maintained its own repository of documents. This contained the entire documentation from earlier projects and was structured in a standardized way, following keywords in E&Y s method in order to facilitate access to concrete examples of the use of general methods and tools in earlier projects. Similarly, AC had document repositories maintained by centres of excellence in different areas, providing concrete examples of working documents (such as proposals) from previous cases, as well as detailed descriptions, in the form of best practices, of what were deemed successful solutions. Cases thus provided an extension of the method, in the sense that they illustrated its translation into use. They did not replace, but complemented the method by exemplifying its use in specific situations. The structure of documents produced in the cases and the terminology used in these documents followed the consultancies shared methods and tools. A senior consultant in E&Y thus described the method as the backbone of the company s knowledge system, in that it provided a shared frame of reference and terminology that enabled the sharing and reuse of material from previous cases. The main advantage attributed to the cases in relation to the method was their level of detail and concreteness. Specifics such as the timing, resource requirements, detailed design of key meetings, and so on were often derived from previous cases. Even if the content of the databases normally gave a fairly detailed picture of the projects from which they emerged, a database search often led to a personal contact with someone involved in the project. Some consultants viewed the databases of cases as mainly a search engine that helped them to identify the cases that were interesting enough to warrant further investigation through personal contacts. The knowledge database in the cases studied thus had a dual function: first, the direct transfer of knowledge between different projects; and second, the establishment of contacts for a more personal transfer of experience in relation to specific projects. Cases could thus be characterized as articulate organizational knowledge, since their availability in the organization-wide databases made them easily accessible to company consultants worldwide. Cases, as a type of knowledge, were characterized by their specificity they documented an idiosyncratic situation. The complexity of real situations was to a large extent preserved,

Werr & Stjernberg: Exploring Management Consulting Firms 893 making the cases a source of knowledge when it came to the question of how to design a specific project rather than how to design a change project in general. Experience In spite of the large amount of readily available articulate knowledge in the form of methods and tools and documentation from previous cases, the consultants in our study repeatedly referred to their own and their colleagues experience as the most important source of knowledge in designing and carrying out consulting projects. The consultants repeatedly stressed the need to adapt both methods and cases to the characteristics of a specific project. Such adaptations were described as a question of experience: The method serves as a structure, not as a replacement for knowledge. You can t give a method to an inexperienced consultant and expect him to be able to run a project. (Senior consultant E&Y) When choosing the level of detail in the mapping of the organization, experience is important. In this choice, I have received good help from Andrew (senior project manager). Being new, there is a risk of being too ambitious, of producing a too detailed mapping, wanting to know all the details. But if you have done it before, you usually stop at a lesser level of detail. This is experience. (Junior consultant E&Y) In the studied organizations, such experience was treated as an organizational asset, which meant applying it not only as a basis for an individual s own actions, but also as a basis for the work of other consultants. Both of the organizations studied had hierarchies ranging from junior consultant to partner. These hierarchies were the basis for a division of labour aimed at the efficient use of experience. Taking proposals as an example, the proposal process at AC was organized in the following way. A client relation was owned by a senior consultant. He or she made the initial contact with a client. However, this senior consultant (partner) was involved only to a limited degree in the actual work of writing a proposal. The responsibility for this was delegated to a consultant with intermediate experience, who worked on it with junior consultants. The junior consultants did most of the work, using the method and earlier cases, and checking their work with intermediate-level consultants. Lastly, before the proposal was sent to the client, it was submitted to the partner owning the client relation for comments and approval. The main role of the senior consultants in this process was adaptation of the general approach and other cases to the specific client s situation. This involved choosing the method to apply, which activities to go through and how much time to spend on each activity. This hierarchical division of labour made it possible to leverage the experienced consultants knowledge by assigning young, inexperienced (and inexpensive) consultants to carry out a large part of the consulting work. The experienced consultants could take a more monitoring role, attending to a specific project only at key decision points or important client presentations. This division of work was not only a way of making available the experienced consultants knowledge to several projects, but also of transferring

894 Organization Studies 24(6) this knowledge to less experienced consultants. Many consultants mentioned that their most valuable learning experiences occurred when working together with other, more experienced consultants. In addition to direct involvement in projects, there were a number of both formal and informal arenas available for sharing the experiential knowledge generated in the various ongoing projects. In E&Y, one such arena was the monthly project leader meeting, in which the project leaders discussed their projects and exchanged experiences on what was working and what was not. The activities of different centres of excellence, related to the filtering and synthesis of the experiences gained in client assignments into PowerPacks or methods, provided another arena. Exchange of experience also took place in more informal arenas, such as spontaneous hallway meetings or over a cup of coffee. The experience gained by individuals in their practice was shared among colleagues as stories about concrete cases. This knowledge was to a large extent tacit, but transformed in part into articulate knowledge through the process of sharing. Extension of experiential knowledge to the organizational level was a question of creating arenas for interaction between consultants possessing, as well as needing, this type of knowledge. The identification of experts in a certain area was supported by the knowledge database as well as the underlying structure of centres of excellence. The organization s directory listed which individuals were active in which centres of excellence, and thus possessed which expertise. The existence of a shared frame of reference and terminology provided by a method was referred to as an important enabler of this direct experience exchange between consultants. Toward a Model of Organizational Competence Based on Interacting Knowledge Elements An important characteristic of the work of the consultants studied here was its collective nature. Consulting projects (from proposal to implementation) were generally carried out in teams that combined varying competencies and levels of expertise. Management consulting within these consultancies was thus a collective process displaying organizational competence. In the above descriptions of the knowledge systems of two international consulting organizations, three knowledge elements were identified (methods and tools, cases, and individual consultant s experience), each representing knowledge of a different character. While experience represented mainly a tacit and individual kind of knowledge in the sense that it was described as hard to articulate, methods and tools and cases represented articulate and organizational knowledge that was readily available in the consultancies electronic knowledge-management systems. The differences between the knowledge elements (methods and tools on the one hand, and cases on the other) also highlighted a second important aspect concerning the character of knowledge the general specific dimension. Whereas methods and tools represented general knowledge aimed at a rather broad area of application,

Werr & Stjernberg: Exploring Management Consulting Firms 895 Figure 1 Three Basic Elements of the Knowledge System and their Interrelations cases represented specific knowledge since they described the approach used in one specific problem setting. The characteristics of the three knowledge elements are summarized in Table 2. As has been indicated by the above empirical description, each knowledge element contributed to the overall knowledge system by leveraging the value of the other knowledge elements. The relations between the different knowledge elements, rather than the elements per se, formed the basis of organizational competence in the management consulting organizations (see Figure 1) and will be discussed further in the following. Provide a language to articulate General knowledge Translates Tacit knowledge Experience Articulate, make visible Specify and exemplify Methods and tools Provide a language to articulate Articulate Experience Translates Methods, Tools and Cases Cases Translates Specific knowledge Experience was the central source of consultants knowledge on how to design, and carry out a consulting project. The main role of experience was in the design of the idiosyncratic project, which required the translation (Czarniawska and Joerges 1996) of articulate knowledge in terms of old cases and methods and tools to fit the specific situation that the consultant was currently working in. This may also be seen as the specific situation being interpreted so as to fit the existing articulate knowledge (Czarniawska 1988). Some support for this latter tendency to view organizational problems in terms of the consultants own methods and tools was found in the simulation study of the proposal process, in which the consultants problem definition as well as proposed remedy was closely linked to the contents of the consultants method (for details, see Werr 1999). The value of adapting the codified knowledge to the specific situation has recently been pointed out by Hansen and Haas (2001), who, in a study of a global consulting organization, found a significant positive correlation between time spent on reworking codified knowledge to fit a specific situation and the quality of the consultants work output in this situation.

896 Organization Studies 24(6) In this process of adapting the articulate general knowledge (methods and tools) and the articulate specific knowledge (cases), experience was described as central. Experience helped the consultant to choose activities from the overall set of activities listed in the method or tool so as to determine how much time to spend on different activities, to choose the most promising solution from a set of old cases, and so on. The process of translation was not described as a conscious, analytical process, but rather as an intuitive process, to a large extent based on tacit knowledge. The relationship between methods and tools and the consultant s experience was also described as partly substitutable. The more experience a consultant had, the less important methods and tools were said to be as guides for action. Only when the method was really mastered could it be departed from. This is consistent with the tendency of consultants to internalize methods, making possible a more flexible use of them (compare Hedlund 1994). Methods and Tools Provide a Common Language While methods and tools were in some cases used as direct guides for action, especially by junior consultants, their main contribution was described as their ability to provide a common framework and terminology for the consultants work process in a specific type of project. Methods and tools (different activities, templates, process phases, and so on) provided a shared framework and terminology for the interchange of experience between different projects in the consulting organization. This common framework and terminology was not only important in facilitating the exchange of experience in face-to-face interaction, but also for structuring the documentation of the cases. For the consultants familiar with the method, projects carried out according to a specific method generated easily recognizable and comparable documentation. The use of elements of the method as a structuring device for the documentation thus facilitated access to this knowledge and helped specify the method, as exemplified in the case of E&Y. A consultant looking for an example of the exact layout of a certain project activity in a specific industry was here able easily to find this in the organization s knowledge database. The proposalwriting experiment with AC also indicated that the consultants method had more profound effects on their thinking, in that it affected their definition of the client s problem and the proposed solution. In this respect, methods and tools may be viewed as providing the consulting organization with a common language, a function which has repeatedly been shown to be central for knowledge transfer (Schein 1996). The concept of language is in this context viewed in a broad, sociological sense, as providing a way of constructing an ordered reality, but also constraining that construction. Berger and Luckmann (1966: 173) refer to language as that which realizes a world in the double sense of apprehending and producing it. Language thus represents a structure of meaning, which guides routine interpretations and conduct, as well as evaluations of different interpretations and affections linked to these (what is liked or not liked ).

Werr & Stjernberg: Exploring Management Consulting Firms 897 Thus, rather than merely providing a procedure to follow, we argue that methods contributed to the creation of a shared language, in the above sense, among consultants using a specific method. This shared language was, in the above cases, found to be an important enabler, not only of the consultants face-to-face exchange of experience, but also of structuring the documentation from previous cases to make them more easily accessible to and applicable by others in the consulting organization. The method s contribution to creating a shared language in the consulting organization was, further, an important facilitator of the interaction among consultants, which in turn was referred to by individual consultants as the most important vehicle of learning. Cases Articulate Experience and Specify and Exemplify Methods One problem the consultants faced in relation to methods and tools was above described as their adaptation to a specific situation. This was shown to be dependent on an experience-based knowledge that is hard to articulate and thus transfer. However, our study suggests that, in this context, cases were helpful in making this highly individual knowledge available to the organization or even transferring limited portions of it to other consultants. As cases of specific projects were descriptions, without ambitions to formulate general rules or relations, they represented the tacit knowledge of how to adapt a general approach to a specific situation. By using old proposals for similar cases rather than a general method as a point of departure for designing a proposal, the consultants could thus tap into the tacit knowledge of the consulting team behind a previous proposal. In doing so, the cases may even lead to a transfer of tacit knowledge (without this being articulated). In line with Boland and Tenkasi s (1995: 367) argument that narratives are a way of making the implicit and tacit inferable to the reader, old cases may be seen as such narratives preserving and making sense of the idiosyncrasies of a specific situation (see also Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995: 69). By these means, cases, at times in combination with discussions with the responsible consultants, were a way of making available and transferring parts of the tacit knowledge required to design an approach or solution that fitted a specific situation with all its idiosyncrasies. Constituting a common language, methods and tools made the cases more accessible and more easily understandable. Experience, methods and tools, and cases were thus closely interlinked, creating a knowledge system which represents organizational competence going beyond the sum of the individual consultant s experiences. The leading element in this system is the consultant s experience, which plays a central role in the generation of methods, tools and cases, and in their translation to a specific situation. Methods, tools and cases are of only limited help to a person lacking the necessary experience for their translation. This establishes the more tacit aspects of the organization members knowledge, that is, their skills and experience, as a key to organizational competence. The mostly tacit element of the knowledge system, which was called experience, thus leveraged the productive use of the more articulate knowledge elements: methods, tools and cases.

898 Organization Studies 24(6) The Dynamics of the Knowledge System While the above exploration of interactions between the three knowledge elements (experience, methods and tools, and cases) focused mainly on the application of existing knowledge, we turn in the following to a discussion of the development of this knowledge. The knowledge base in the two consultancies studied to a large extent originated in the consultants experiences in ongoing projects. Some of these experiences had been synthesized and abstracted into formal methods and tools, others were inferable from cases, and yet others remained in the heads of the individual consultants. The development of the knowledge system thus dealt to a large extent with making the experience gained in projects available to others in the organization (compare Moore and Birkinshaw 1998; Morris 2001; Sarvary 1999). In this process, articulate knowledge, in the form of methods and tools and cases, was an important enabler. The ability of the articulate knowledge to function as a direct carrier of this knowledge was, however, more limited. The development of articulate methods, tools and cases was a central element in the consultancies systematic development of their knowledge base. Methods both triggered recurring reflection on the ongoing practice of the consultancy and facilitated the dissemination of the lessons learned throughout the organization, as changes to the method were expected to be internalized by the consultants. Much of the knowledge generated in the ongoing projects was, however, regarded as difficult to articulate. The main barrier to codification was claimed to be the specificity of each new consulting project, requiring adaptation to the new situation. Consequently, development of the knowledge system was also dependent on making the individual consultant s tacit knowledge available to the organization. Two ways to tackle this challenge could be observed in the studied organizations: leveraging and extension. Both were linked to the hierarchical and team-based organizing models observed. Through leveraging an individual consultant s experience was made available to the organization by organizational means. In the hierarchical organization of the consulting companies, the experienced consultants participation in projects was limited to the situations in which their experience was most valuable. The consultancies organizational structure, based on centres of excellence and directories of consultant expertise, also contributed to the identification and accessibility of knowledgeable individuals in the organization. Through extension the consultant s tacit experiences were not only made available, but transferred to other consultants, which required the creation of shared experiences (Brown and Duguid 1991; Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995). This kind of interaction was built into the consultancies hierarchical organizational model through the mentor system and the conscious composition of project teams to include both different competencies and levels of experience. Articulate methods and tools played an enabling role in both leveraging

Werr & Stjernberg: Exploring Management Consulting Firms 899 and extension by providing a common language that facilitated communication and interaction that supported the exchange of experience between consultants. This indicates a dialectic relation between articulate and tacit knowledge in developing the organizational knowledge system. The experience gained was to some extent articulated in methods and cases, which in turn enabled the interaction and exchange of consultants between teams, facilitating the acquisition of new experiences for each consultant as well as for the organization at large. Discussion The knowledge system model for management consultancies presented in this article indicates a reciprocal relationship between articulate knowledge, in the form of methods and tools and cases, and tacit knowledge, in the form of consultants experiences. This relationship may however be argued to impede knowledge development beyond a given set of assumptions, since the language provided by methods and tools may have a focusing and standardizing effect on the actions of consultants. This language, provided by the methods and tools and reproduced by the cases, limited the range of views and practices within a consulting organization (see also Morris 2001; Pringle 1998). The following two sections discuss the described knowledge system s role in both supporting and limiting the creation of new knowledge, which can be seen at both the organizational and the individual level. On the organizational level, the creation and transfer of new experiences is both facilitated and limited by the methods and tools the language that frames these experiences. On the individual level, the knowledge system facilitates the recruitment and socialization of new consultants, while it limits the type of personalities and backgrounds that are given the opportunity to enter the large international consultancies. Knowledge Creation and the Knowledge System As described above, the development of the knowledge system was to a large extent based on experience from ongoing projects, which was in turn guided by the methods, tools and cases available in the consultancy. Furthermore, the perception and interpretation of the experiences of the consultants were limited by the concepts and notions (that is, the language) provided by the method and tools, as illustrated by the proposal-writing experiment, in which the consultants method guided their interpretation of the client s problem (see also Alvesson 1995; Kim 1993). This creates the image of a circular learning process where experience guides action, action fuels the development of methods, tools and cases, and these in turn guide action and thereby the experience gained. This potentially closed loop may be further enforced by the consultancy s reputation, which is a prerequisite for acquiring new projects and thereby new

900 Organization Studies 24(6) experience. As pointed out by Löwendahl et al. (2001), the professional service firm s ability to learn is path dependent, as previous projects create the organization s knowledge base and thereby its reputation, leading to further assignments in that specific area of expertise. The knowledge system observed in the global management consulting organizations studied thus seems well suited for evolutionary learning based on a continuous revision of practices within the domain of an existing thought world and its associated language (Boland and Tenkasi 1995). However, as argued by Brown and Duguid (1991), this does not mean that organizations must be trapped within their world-view. The close connection between practice and the formalized representations of knowledge (methods, tools and cases) observed in the consulting companies, as well as the consultants flexible and improvising use of the methods observed in our study, opens the way for a continuous adaptation of the world-view to changes in the organization s environment. Furthermore, innovation can be enhanced by the reflection process triggered by method development, where practices, actions and processes that are taken for granted are made visible, scrutinized and reflected upon. This process of reflection provides opportunities for more profound changes of beliefs and actions (Boland and Tenkasi 1995). The above-proposed model of the knowledge system and its development indicates a knowledge-creation process similar to that described by Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995). Like Nonaka and Takeuchi s model, the model presented here views an individual s tacit experiences as the origin of organizational knowledge creation. In the knowledge-creation process, these tacit experiences are then developed and spread within the organization through a number of knowledge conversions, in which experiences are shared and to some extent made explicit. While the current study supports the model of Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995), it also highlights the importance of some of its less elaborated aspects. Nonaka and Takeuchi s model focuses on a single knowledge-creation process and says little about the context of parallel or earlier knowledge-creation processes. Based on this study, we would like to emphasize the importance of this context as both an enabler of and an impediment to the knowledge-creation process. The existence of a common language developed through earlier knowledge-creation processes may, for example, enable the dissemination of experience gained through both socialization and articulation. At the same time, however, this language may limit knowledge creation by dictating the range and interpretation of experiences made. The model presented above (in itself a language for transmitting our understanding of knowledge systems in consultancies) thus indicates the importance of the articulate parts of the knowledge system as support for the direct sharing of experiences across individual consultants and for the creation of shared experiences in consulting assignments. The degree to which this standardized system also limits the creation of new knowledge would be a worthy task for further research. What characterizes new, innovative practices, and what role does existing articulate knowledge play in the creation of these innovative practices? How much room is there for diversity

Werr & Stjernberg: Exploring Management Consulting Firms 901 in approaches and methods and tools, and how are unorthodox approaches incorporated into the knowledge systems? Individual Development and the Knowledge System A second theme to be discussed in relation to the above model of the knowledge system in management consulting organizations concerns the role and development of the individual consultant in relation to the structural capital of the organization. While the theoretical tradition of knowledge as theory depicts the individual as a mere cog in the organizational knowledge machinery, the tradition of knowledge as practice sees the individual as the only possible carrier of knowledge, thus to a large extent denying any added value imparted by the formal organization and its support structures on the individual knowledge worker. Our studies indicate that the constitution of the knowledge system in global management consulting firms requires an intense development of structural capital as a support for, rather than an alternative to, investments in human capital (compare Edvinsson and Malone 1997). Rather than decreasing the value of the consultants experience, development of structural capital in the form of methods and tools and cases may indeed increase this value. By enabling the leveraging of experienced consultants knowledge, structural knowledge increases the economic rewards to those with most experience (partners) in the kinds of partnerships studied (see also Maister 1993). The indicated close interplay between structural knowledge and individual knowledge places some demands on individual knowledge, however, as this has to fit the structural knowledge. Rather than recruiting experienced and proven consultants, the consultancies studied focused on recruiting people with a potential to develop consulting expertise by applying the company s structural knowledge, that is, its methods, cases and globally organized experience. Qualities sought among potential employees included analytical and social skills and the motivation to achieve, rather than knowledge of a specific subject or domain. The perfect recruit was a person willing to be exploited in terms of sacrificing leisure and family, at least for some years, and willing and able to exploit the firm for future career goals (Bergström 1998). Recruiting potential management consultants rather than proven consultants made it possible to shape the human capital of the firm so as to fit the structural capital. Consequently, recruiters focused on young individuals, typically from the top-ranking engineering and business schools. However, in recent years, the recruiters hunting grounds have expanded to include other elite education programmes, such as medical schools, the content knowledge of which has a more dubious direct value for management consulting. What the recruiters seem to value among educational institutions is their screening and development of an individual s analytical capacity and ability to work hard. However, the degree of prescribed use of standardized methods and tools varies between consultancies as a result of their recruiting strategies. As claimed by a former manager of one of the studied consulting firms, the

902 Organization Studies 24(6) emphasis on methods and tools becomes necessarily greater in a firm which is able to recruit good, but not the absolutely best individuals. In such cases, the structural capital may compensate for the somewhat lower human capital value. This is achieved by creating an environment that supports the dissemination and collective use of both tacit and articulate knowledge. Thus is highlighted the relationship between structural capital and human capital in understanding knowledge-management strategies. Such a relationship has been pointed out by Hansen et al. (1999), for example, who propose that, depending on their strategic focus, organizations face a choice of either investing in their structural capital or in their human capital. Based on the above model, it may, however, be argued that both structural capital and human capital are important regardless of an organization s strategic focus, though the content of the individual and structural capital may vary. Thus, an important task for further research may be a more in-depth investigation into what structural capital to invest in and what human capital to develop in different situations. Conclusions The aim of this article has been to develop a model of the organizational knowledge system in management consulting organizations, and for this model to go beyond viewing organizational knowledge as that captured in documents stored in databases or that existing only in the heads of knowledgeable individuals. In line with other researchers, for example, Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995), we have argued that an understanding of the organizational knowledge system may instead require the recognition of the relations of articulate knowledge on the one hand, and tacit knowledge on the other. Based on case studies in two global consulting organizations a model was designed which identified three interrelated knowledge elements: common methods and tools, a repository of cases, and individual consultants experience. The methods and tools of this system, it was suggested, provide a shared language that enabled the documentation and exchange of experience, while the shared cases provided narratives that exemplified the translation of general and abstract approaches to specific cases. It was argued that both of these articulate knowledge elements are dependent on the ability of experienced consultants to translate the methods, tools and cases to the situation at hand. The use and dissemination of the, thus, central experiences of individual consultants was largely enabled by organizational means such as a competence-based hierarchical organization, team-based work in consulting projects, and so on. Together, the three knowledge elements constitute what might be called organizational competence in management consulting organizations. In addition, though action by the consultants was to a large extent described as intuitive, and thus based on tacit knowledge, the more articulate forms of knowledge (methods and tools, in particular) were identified as facilitators of the consulting organization s continuous development of its collective

Werr & Stjernberg: Exploring Management Consulting Firms 903 competence, through providing a common language for knowledge development and exchange. Against this background, we question the dichotomous treatment of the character of organizational knowledge as being solely articulate or tacit. Rather, we suggest that tacit and articulate knowledge should be seen as symbiotic, providing the prerequisites for one another s use and development. Thus, articulate knowledge does not replace tacit knowledge, but enables its exchange and use on an organizational basis. The role of the articulate knowledge was only to a limited extent one of directly transferring knowledge and guiding action. Rather, the existence of articulate knowledge contributed to the development of the knowledge system by structuring and stabilizing it, and thus facilitating communication, as well as by fostering reflection upon ongoing practices. Articulate knowledge in the form of methods and tools thus gained importance, not as actable knowledge per se, but by providing the consulting organization with a common language. This common language served to facilitate the identification, development and sharing of tacit and situated knowledge in the form of cases and individual consultants experiences. We, therefore, argue that understanding competence in management consulting organizations is facilitated by focusing on the ways in which tacit and articulate knowledge, as well as general and specific knowledge, are interrelated at the individual and organizational level. With its focus on the complementary relation between tacit and explicit knowledge within the organization, the current model is related to the model of organizational knowledge creation proposed by Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995). However, while these authors, in their mainly conceptual treatment of the knowledge-creation process, focus on a single process, our study indicates the importance of viewing knowledge creation and knowledge consumption (an issue treated only briefly by Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995)) in the context of both earlier and ongoing knowledge-creation processes processes that produced and reproduce the common language within which current processes of knowledge creation take place. Lastly, the generalizability of the model developed in this article can be discussed. When discussing knowledge-management practices in professional service firms, a distinction is often made between organizations with relatively standardized services and organizations with a more creative service content (Hansen et al. 1999; Löwendahl et al. 2001; Maister 1993; Sarvary 1999). Within the management consulting industry, big five consulting companies such as Cap Gemini Ernst & Young and Accenture are often described as offering more standardized services, whereas the traditional strategy consulting companies such as McKinsey, BCG and Bain offer a less standardized and more creative kind of service (Hansen et al. 1999). This study has focused on companies categorized as providing more standardized services. Based on a limited number of interviews (see Werr et al. 1997) and the case studies of others (for example, Bartlett 1996; Peters 1992), our understanding of companies that offer less standardized services indicates that the proposed model may also have some validity in these organizations. However, the character of the articulate knowledge element, the common language, varied

904 Organization Studies 24(6) Note References between the different types of companies. Whereas companies offering more standardized services had comprehensive and detailed methodologies covering the entire project life cycle, consultancies offering less standardized services focused on articulate knowledge in the form of single tools, and articulate values and perspectives. The nature of the common language within the consulting organizations thus seemed to differ depending on the nature of the service offered. Exploration of these differences offers a potentially rewarding path for further research. The authors would like to thank the three anonymous reviewers and C. R. (Bob) Hinings for their helpful comments in the process of revising this article. Alvesson, Mats 1993 Organizations as rhetoric: Knowledge-intensive firms and the struggle with ambiguity. Journal of Management Studies 30/6: 997 1015. Alvesson, Mats 1995 Management of knowledge intensive companies. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Bäcklund, Jonas, and Andreas Werr 2001 The construction of global management consulting: A study of global consultancies web presentations. SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Business Administration. Stockholm: Stockholm School of Economics. Bartlett, Christopher 1996 Mckinsey & Company: Managing knowledge and learning. Case study. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School. Berger, Peter, and Thomas Luckmann 1966 The social construction of reality. London: Penguin Books. Bergström, Ola 1998 Att passa in: rekryteringsarbete i ett kunskapsintensivt företag (To fit in: Recruitment in knowledge-intensive firms). Göteborg: BAS förlag. Bessant, John, and Howard Rush 1995 Building bridges for innovation: The role of consultants in technology transfer. Research Policy 24: 97 114. Boland, Richard J., and Ramkrishnan V. Tenkasi 1995 Perspective making and perspective taking in communities of knowing. Organization Science 6/4: 350 373. Brown, John Seely, and Paul Duguid 1991 Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning and innovation. Organization Science 2/1: 40 57. Chard, Marie 1997 Knowledge management at Ernst and Young. Case study. Stanford, CA: Graduate School of Business, Stanford University. Cook, Scott D. N., and Dvora Yanow 1996 Culture and organizational learning in Organizational learning. M. Cohen and L. S. Sproul (eds), 430 459. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Czarniawska, Barbara 1988 To coin a phrase: On organizational talk, organizational control and management consulting. Stockholm: Economic Research Institute. Czarniawska, Barbara, and Bernward Joerges 1996 Travels of ideas in Translating organizational change. B. Czarniawska and G. Sevón (eds), 13 49. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Werr & Stjernberg: Exploring Management Consulting Firms 905 Davenport, Thomas H., and Morten T. Hansen 1998 Knowledge management at Andersen Consulting. Case Study. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Fincham, Robin 1999 The consultant-client relationship: Critical perspectives on the management of organizational change. Journal of Management Studies 36/3: 331 351. Dreyfus, Hubert, and Stuart Dreyfus 1986 Why computers may never think like people. Technology Review 89: 42 62. Dunford, Richard 2000 Key challenges in the search for the effective management of knowledge in management consulting firms. Journal of Knowledge Management 4/4: 295 302. Easterby-Smith, Mark 1997 Disciplines of organizational learning: Contributions and critiques. Human Relations 50/9: 1085 1113. Easterby-Smith, Mark, Robin Snell, and Silvia Gherardi 1998 Organizational learning: Diverging communities of practice? Management Learning 29/3: 259 272. Edvinsson, Leif, and Michael S. Malone 1997 Intellectual capital. New York: Harper Business. Eisenhardt, Kathleen. 1989 Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review 14/4: 532 550. Empson, Laura 2001a Introduction: Knowledge management in professional service firms. Human Relations 54/7: 811 817. Empson, Laura 2001b Fear of exploitation and fear of contamination: Impediments to knowledge transfer in mergers between professional service firms. Human Relations 54/7: 839 862. Ericsson, Anders, and Herbert A. Simon 1984 Protocol analysis, verbal reports as data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Furusten, Staffan 1995 The managerial discourse: A study of the creation and diffusion of popular management knowledge. Uppsala: Department of Business Studies, Uppsala University. Glaser, Barney. G., and Anselm L. Strauss 1967 The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine de Gruyter. Göranzon, Bo 1988 The practice and the use of computers. A paradoxical encounter between different traditions of knowledge in Knowledge, skill and artificial intelligence. B. Göranzon and I. Josefson (eds), 9 18. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer Verlag. Greiner, Larry, and Robert Metzger 1983 Consulting to management. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Hansen, Morten T. 1999 The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly 44: 82 111. Hansen, Morten T., and Martine R. Haas 2001 Different knowledge, different benefits: Toward a productivity perspective on knowledge sharing in organizations. Presented at the Academy of Management Meeting, Washington. Hansen, Morten T., Nitin Nohria, and Thomas Tierney 1999 What s your strategy for managing knowledge? Harvard Business Review, March April: 106 116. Hargadon, Andrew B. 1998 Firms as knowledge brokers: Lessons in pursuing continuous innovation. California Management Review 40/3: 209 227.

906 Organization Studies 24(6) Hedlund, Gunnar 1994 A model of knowledge management and the N-form corporation. Strategic Management Journal 15: 73 90. Janik, A. 1988 Tacit knowledge, working life and scientific method in Knowledge, skill and artificial intelligence. B. Göranzon and I. Josefson (eds), 53 63. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer Verlag. Josefson, Ingela 1988 The nurse as engineer: The theory of knowledge in research in the care sector in Knowledge, skill and artificial intelligence. B. Göranzon and I. Josefson (eds), 19 30. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer Verlag. Josefson, Ingela 1992 Language and experience in Skill & education: Reflection and experience. B. Göranzon and M. Florin (eds), 77 82. London: Springer Verlag. Kim, Daniel H. 1993 The link between individual and organizational learning. Sloan Management Review 35/1: 37 50. Kipping, Matthias, and Thomas Armbrüster 1998 Management consultants and management knowledge: A literature review. Unpublished research paper. University of Reading. Kipping, Matthias, and Abdolreza Scheybani 1994 From scope to scale: Tendances récentes du marché allemand du conseil en management. Revue de L IRES 1994/14: 173 199. Lave, Jean, and Etienne Wenger 1991 Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Löwendahl, Bente R., Öivind Revang, and Siw M. Fosstenlökken 2001 Knowledge and value creation in professional service firms: A framework for analysis. Human Relations 54/7: 911 931. Maister, David 1993 Managing the professional service firm. New York: Free Press. March, Artemis 1997 A note on knowledge management. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Martiny, Marilyn 1998 Knowledge management at HP consulting. Organizational Dynamics 27/2: 71 77. Moore, Karl, and Julian Birkinshaw 1998 Managing knowledge in global service firms: Centers of excellence. Academy of Management Executive 12/4: 81 92. Morris, Timothy 2001 Asserting property rights: Knowledge codification in the professional service firm. Human Relations 54/7: 819 838. Nonaka, Ikujiro, and Hirotaka Takeuchi 1995 The knowledge creating company. New York: Oxford University Press. Peters, Tom 1992 Liberation management. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Polanyi, Micheal 1967 The tacit dimension. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Pringle, Edward G. 1998 Do proprietary tools lead to cookie cutter consulting? Journal of Management Consulting 10/1: 3 7. Sahlin-Andersson, Kerstin 1996 Imitating by editing success: The construction of organizational fields in Translating organizational change. B. Czarniawska and G. Sevón (eds), 69 92. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Salaman, Graeme 2002 Understanding advice: Towards a sociology of management consultancy in Critical consulting: New perspectives on the management advice industry. T. Clark and R. Fincham (eds), 347 360. Oxford: Blackwell.

Werr & Stjernberg: Exploring Management Consulting Firms 907 Andreas Werr Sarvary, Miklos 1999 Knowledge management and competition in the consulting industry. California Management Review 41/2: 95 107. Schein, Edgar H. 1996 Three cultures of management: The key to organizational learning. Sloan Management Review, fall: 9 20. Schön, Donald 1983 The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Aldershot: Avebury. Starbuck, William H. 1992 Learning by knowledge-intensive firms. Journal of Management Studies 26/6: 713 740. Strauss, Anselm, and Juliet Corbin 1994 Grounded theory methodology in Handbook of qualitative methods. N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (eds), 273 285. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Suddaby, Roy, and Royston Greenwood 2001 Colonizing knowledge: Commodification as a dynamic of jurisdictional expansion in professional service firms. Human Relations 54/7: 933 953. Tsoukas, Haridimos 1996 The firm as a distributed knowledge system: A constructionist approach. Strategic Management Journal, Special Issue, winter, 17: 11 25. Turner, Barry A. 1981 Some practical aspects of qualitative data analysis: One way of organising the cognitive processes associated with the generation of grounded theory. Quality and Quantity 15: 225 247. Van Maanen, John 1979 The fact of fiction in organizational ethnography. Administrative Science Quarterly 24/4: 539 550. Werr, Andreas 1999 The language of change: The roles of methods in the work of management consultants. Ph.D. Thesis. Stockholm School of Economics. Werr, Andreas, Torbjörn Stjernberg, and Peter Docherty 1997 The functions of methods of change in management consulting. Journal of Organizational Change Management 10/4: 288 307. Andreas Werr is Assistant Professor at the Stockholm School of Economics. His main domain of research is the phenomenon of management consulting, which he has studied from a number of theoretical and empirical perspectives. His special interest in the phenomenon of structured methods in the work of management consultants led to his Ph.D. thesis: The language of change: The roles of methods in the work of management consultants. His English publications include several book chapters and articles in Economic and Industrial Democracy, Journal of Organizational Change Management and Organization. Address: Stockholm School of Economics, Box 6501, SE-113 83 Stockholm, Sweden. E-mail: andreas.werr@hhs.se Torbjörn Stjernberg Torbjörn Stjernberg is Chair of Organization Theory at the School of Economics and Commercial Law at Göteborg University. His published works include research on methods and tools for organizational change, approaches to the integration of change in major change efforts, and the viability and diffusion of organizational ideas. He has also studied complex planning and implementation processes in networks of organizations. His publications in English include articles in Human Relations, Scandinavian Journal of Management, Journal of Organizational Change

908 Organization Studies 24(6) Management, Research in Organizational Change and Development, European Journal for Work and Organization Psychology. Address: School of Economics and Commercial Law at Göteborg University, Box 610, SE-405 30, Göteborg, Sweden. E-mail: torbjorn.stjernberg@mgmt.gu.se