A Pattern Language for Knowledge Handover When People Transition

Abstract

Handover of knowledge and responsibilities can cause problems when people transfer to other parts of a company or retire. Handover issues became apparent in Japan when many people from the Baby Boomer Generation retired simultaneously in 2007. In particular, this was a resounding issue in the software industry. Most business people are familiar with the concept of a handover. Although effective handovers are crucial for seamless business operations during personnel changes, the preferable elements for a handover are ambiguous. In this paper, we outline a “Pattern Language for Knowledge Handover when People Transition”. The pattern language consists of handover patterns. Actual handover patterns were pattern mined from our experience as well as from industrial interviews. We originally started with handover anti-patterns which identify actual problems for a handover. This led us to pattern mine the handover patterns that provide strategies to mitigate these problems. The examples are from software industry, but these patterns are applicable to other domains.

Appendices

Appendix

Here we introduce three anti-pattern figures (Unsupported to review, Background is omitted, and Necessary knowledge is omitted) and three pattern figures (Spread of knowledge, Handover space, and Firewall for the handover). The three anti-pattern figures describe the mechanism of handover problems. These figures express how they are resolved. By using UML, readers can easily understand where problems exist, how a pattern works, and what problems are resolved.

Appendix A: Anti-pattern Figures

We describe the result of an ideal handover and an anti-pattern handover by a class diagram. The diagram reveals the gaps and identifies the location of the problem easily be visualized. Herein we explain three anti-pattern figures (Fig. 7).

Fig. 7.

Unsupported to review

Unsupported to review

First, a third party reviews the formalized knowledge. They indicate whether the predecessor omits some necessary knowledge. Because the successor cannot inherit omitted knowledge, the predecessor should reflect on the third party’s feedback to verify all necessary knowledge is included (Fig. 8).

Fig. 8.

Background is unclear

Background is omitted

The background impacts the system. The predecessor who has been engaged in the system for many years knows such knowledge, which may not be included in the documents handed over to the successor. The successor must maintain the system without the background knowledge that may affect the system (Fig. 9).

Fig. 9.

Necessary knowledge is omitted

Necessary knowledge is omitted

In many cases, the predecessor formally conveys necessary knowledge in documents. All the necessary knowledge should be communicated to the successor. However, some omissions may occur unintentionally due to forgetting to write down crucial information. In such a case, the omitted knowledge is lost.

Appendix B: Pattern Figures

In this section, we describe the before and after situations of the patterns’ use by class diagrams. To easily understand the impact of the patterns, the class diagrams depict the before and after situation. Herein we outline three pattern figures (Fig. 10).

Fig. 10.

Spread of knowledge

Spread of knowledge.

Before using the patterns, “Knowledge” and “Predecessor” are one-to-one relationship. That is, only the predecessor has “Knowledge”. However, this pattern subdivided “Knowledge” into “Knowledge item”, which is shared by several third parties. “Knowledge” is subdivided because it is inappropriate for third parties to have all the knowledge as the responsibility may become ambiguous. By using this pattern, the predecessor’s knowledge is backed up after the personnel changes (Fig. 11).

Fig. 11.

Handover space

Handover space

Before using the pattern, the predecessor and the successor are handing over in the “usual room”. The handover may be interrupted when outsiders come to ask the predecessor questions. Therefore, the predecessor and the successor move to a “different room” and hand over there, making it more difficult for outsiders to interrupt the handover.

Firewall for the handover

Before using the pattern, outsiders can easily contact the predecessor. However, by relaying the communication between outsiders and the predecessor via a third party, outsiders cannot directly contact the predecessor. The third party acts as a relay to avoid unnecessary interruptions. In other words, the third party becomes the Firewall of the handover (Fig. 12).

Fig. 12.

Firewall for handover