Eindhoven University of Technology

MASTER

Improving knowledge transfer between shift teams

Geluk, M.

Award date:2017

Link to publication

DisclaimerThis document contains a student thesis (bachelor's or master's), as authored by a student at Eindhoven University of Technology. Studenttheses are made available in the TU/e repository upon obtaining the required degree. The grade received is not published on the documentas presented in the repository. The required complexity or quality of research of student theses may vary by program, and the requiredminimum study period may vary in duration.

General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright ownersand it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.

• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain

Eindhoven,May2017

Improvingknowledgetransferbetweenshiftteams

ByM.(Misja)Geluk

BSc.Architecture,BuildingandPlanning–TU/e2014

Studentidentitynumber0733791

InpartialfulfillmentoftherequirementsofthedegreeofMasterofScience

InInnovationManagement

Supervisors:Dr.A.A.Alblas EindhovenUniversityofTechnology,ITEMDr.ir.arch.I.M.M.J.Reymen EindhovenUniversityofTechnology,ITEMDr.K.Eling EindhovenUniversityofTechnology,ITEMIr.G.P.J.Verstegen EindhovenUniversityofTechnology,ITEMIr.M.Welten ASML,TWINSCANFactoryNXT

DepartmentofIndustrialEngineering&InnovationSciencesEindhoven,UniversityofTechnologySubjectheadings: organizationallearning,intra-organizationalknowledge

transfer,shiftteams,testdepartment,lithographysystems

ii

ManagementsummaryIntroductionandproblemstatementOrganizationsthathavetheabilitytotransferknowledgeeffectivelyfromoneunittoanotherarefoundtobemoreproductiveandmorelikelytosurvivethanorganizationsthatdonothavethatability(Argoteetal.,2000).However,itremainsdifficultforcompaniestoimproveknowledgetransfer.

ASML, the largest supplier worldwide to the semiconductor industry, also faces the challenge ofoptimizing knowledge transfer. The team facing difficulties with knowledge transfer at ASML is atroubleshootteaminatestdepartmentworkingina24/7shift-schedule,consistingoffiveshiftteams:“Test Troubleshoot 5-shift” (TT5). ASML however has limited knowledge of the factors affectingknowledge transfer. This research explores the factors driving and hampering knowledge transferbetweenshiftteams,inordertoanswerthefollowingmainresearchquestion:HowshouldASMLadaptitsorganizationalandworkprocessesinordertoimproveknowledgetransferbetweenteamsthatworkinshifts?

Toanswer themain researchquestion, the research isdivided into twodifferentparts:diagnosisandsolutiondesign.ThediagnosticphasefocusesonunderstandingthedriversandbarrierspresentatASMLandthecurrent issueswithknowledgetransfer.Thesolutiondesign focuseson improvingthecurrentissuesanddevelopingadesign.

TheoreticalframeworkKnowledge transfer is referred to as “the process through which one unit (e.g., individual, group,department,anddivision) isaffectedbytheexperienceofanother”(Argote&Ingram,2000,p.151).Atheoretical framework is built consisting of nine expected drivers and barriers of knowledge transferbetweenshiftteams.Thesedriversandbarriersaredividedintothreetypesofcharacteristics:

- Knowledgecharacteristics:knowledgetacitnessandcomplexity;- Networkcharacteristics:networkstructure,sharedvision,tiestrengthandtrust;- Personalcharacteristics:motivation,disseminativecapacityandabsorptivecapacity.

All nine factors are expected to influence knowledge transfer between shift teams. The drivers andbarriers are linked to design parameters that can be influenced within the organization. The designparameters are the following: interaction mechanism, interaction frequency, interaction formality,interactiontime,goallevel,uniformwayofworking,networkstabilityandnetworksize.

MethodologyThe research design is based on the regulative, empirical, and the reflective cycle of van Aken et al.(2007).Thisresearchconsistsoftwomainphases:diagnosisandsolutiondesign.Duringthediagnosticphase data is collected through semi-structured interviews and complemented by additional sources.Theinterviewdataiscodedusingapredefinedsetofcodesbasedonthetheoreticalframework.Ontopofthat,additionalcodesarecreatedthroughopencodingmethod.Forthesolutiondesign,brainstormswith the engineers are organized to collect data. Based on these results, three concept solutions aredeveloped.Next,theconceptsolutionsareevaluatedtogetherwiththeengineersandafinalsolutionis

iii

chosen. After the selection of the final solution, detailing sessions with each shift team are held tofinalizethesolutiondesign.

ResultsdiagnosisTo answer the main research question, the current situation is thoroughly analyzed. During thediagnosticphasethefactorsdrivingandhamperingknowledgetransferbetweentheshiftteamsofTT5are researched. Empirical evidence for all nine factors, as proposed in the theoretical framework, isfound: knowledge tacitness and complexity (knowledge characteristics), network structure, sharedvision, tie strength, and trust (network characteristics), and motivation, disseminative capacity, andabsorptive capacity (personal characteristics). On top of that, the theoretical framework is enhancedwith three additional factors that were found during empirical research: knowledge transfermechanisms, knowing what others know and knowledge transfer process. The empirical model isdepictedintheFigureMS1.

FigureMS1:Empiricalmodel

Basedontheresultsofthediagnosis,thedesignparametersareadjusted.Theinitialparameterswerethefollowing:interactionmechanism,interactionfrequency,interactionformality,interactiontime,goallevel, uniform way of working, network stability and network size. Three additional parameters arecreated:knowledgetobetransferred,whoknowswhatandefforttotransferknowledge.

Afterevaluatingtheempiricalmodelwiththemanagerandateamleaderofthetestdepartment, it isconfirmedthatthemainissuesarecausedbythefollowingfactors:knowledgetacitness,sharedvision,tie strength, trust, motivation, knowledge transfer mechanisms, knowing what others know and aprocessforknowledgetransfer.

ResultssolutiondesignTogetherwithmanagementthedecisionismadetofocusthesolutiondesignondevelopingagreementswith the engineers on what knowledge they should transfer and how they should transfer thatknowledgetoeachother.ThefinalsolutiondesignandagreementisfortheTT5engineerstotransferall

ExperienceteamA

ExperienceteamB

PerformanceteamB

PerformanceteamA

4

3

2

1

- Knowledgecharacteristics:- Tacitness- Complexity

- Networkcharacteristics:- Networkstructure- Sharedvision- Tiestrength- Trust

- Personalcharacteristics- Motivation- Disseminative capacity- Absorptive capacity

- Knowledge transfermechanisms- Knowingwhatothersknow- Processforknowledge transfer

Knowledge transfer:2&3Knowledge creation:1&4

iv

new knowledge on disturbances at the system (DN’s), tools, software and hardware, which willpositivelyaffecttheirperformanceandtroubleshootingskills.Theengineerswillbeusingthreedifferentmechanisms to transfer this knowledge: anonline knowledge-sharing tool, the shift transfer, andTT5meetings.ThefinalsolutiondesignisdepictedinFigureMS2.

FigureMS2:Solutiondesign

ThesolutiondesignsolvestheproblemsthatASMLwasfacinginseveralways.Withthesolutiondesign,the online knowledge-sharing tool will provide the engineers with a good overview of what theircolleaguesknow.Theengineerswillstillhavetheshifttransfer,asthisisthebestmechanismtotransferissuesfromtheoutgoingshifttotheincomingshift.Theknowledgesharingmeetingsarechosenfortheengineers to get to knoweachotherbetter andbuild a trustful relationship.With that, theyarealsoexpected tobemoremotivated tohelp eachother. Theyhavemore time to transfer knowledgeandtherefore the transfer of tacit knowledge is facilitated. The uniform way of working will lead to anincreasedsharedvisionandwilldiminishreinventionofthewheelandredoingworkofpreviousshifts.TheimpactmodelofthefinalsolutiondesignisdepictedinFigureMS3.

FigureMS3:Impactmodeloffinalsolutiondesign

TheoreticalimplicationsThe theoretical contributionsof this researchare twofold.Firstofall,a theoretical framework for thedriversandbarriersofknowledgetransferbetweenshift teams isbuilt,confirmedandenhanced.The

Knowledgetransfer

Allnew knowledgeonDN’s,tools,

software,hardware

Knowledgesharingmeetings

Shifttransfer Onlineknowledgesharingtool

Finalsolutiondesign:newknowledgeviaOneNote,shifttransferandmeetings

Uniformwayofworking

OverviewofwhoknowswhatinOneNote

Moreinteraction,formalandinformal

Increasedtiestrength,trustandmotivation

Increasedsharedvision

Lessreinventionofthewheelandredoingworkofpreviousshifts

Improvedknowledgetransfer

andincreasedperformance

Facilitatedtransferoftacitandcomplexknowledge

v

researchprovidesempiricalevidenceforthenineproposedbarriersanddriversofknowledgetransfer:knowledge tacitness and complexity (knowledge characteristics), network structure, shared vision, tiestrength,trust(networkcharacteristics),andmotivation,disseminativecapacityandabsorptivecapacity(personalcharacteristics).Ontopofthat,thetheoretical framework isenhancedwiththreeadditionalfactors that were found during empirical research: knowledge transfer mechanisms, knowing whatothersknowandknowledgetransferprocess.

Secondly,itshedsnewempiricallightonovercomingthebarriersofknowledgetransferinashiftworkenvironment. The research not only presents the factors that influence knowledge transfer, but alsoprovidesasolutiondesign.Therecommendationsarecreatedtogetherwiththeengineers,providingasupportedsolution.

PracticalimplicationsInordertoimplementthefinalsolutiondesign,severalstepsshouldbeexecuted.Thefirststepforthemanagerofthetestdepartmentandtheinvolvedteamleadersistoinformtherestoftheteamleadersand the TT5 engineers on the solution design and the new agreements for knowledge transfer. ThesecondstepfortheengineersistofillouttheOneNotefileasfaraspossible,suchthatthereisabasicOneNotefiletostartwith.Thethirdstepafteristodoapilottotestthesolutiondesign.Thefourthstepistoevaluatethepilotafterthepilotisfinishedandtoadjustthefinalsolutiondesign.Thefinalstepistoimplementtheadjustedsolutiondesign.

On top of practical implications concerning the solution design, two additional recommendations aredeveloped. First of all, it is recommended to create a shared vision. This canbedoneby focusingonfollowingthesamewayofworkinginthedifferentteamsandcompetences,andbyhavingateamgoaland an approach to it. The next recommendation is the use of temporary personnel movement.Temporary personnel movement is suggested to improve relationships between the different shiftteamsandfacilitatethetransferoftacitknowledge.

LimitationsandfutureresearchThe generalizability of the research is debatable. Even though the factors that drive and hamperknowledgetransferbetweenshiftteamsareinlinewiththefindingsofthetheoreticalframework,itisnotclaimed that the findingsare representativeandgeneralizable toall shiftenvironments.Onlyonedepartment working in a 5-shift schedule within a single organization is researched.However, sinceotherdepartmentswithinASMLmentionedsimilarissues,theresultscanbegeneralizedwithinASML.

Secondly,ontopof thetwelve factorsaffectingknowledgetransfer therecouldbemoreexplanationswhypeopledonot transferknowledge.Forexample,during theresearcha reorganizationtookplace.Thiscouldhave ledtopeoplebeingscared losingtheir jobsandcausedthemtobeprotectiveoftheirownknowledge.Another factor that couldhavean influenceonknowledge transfer that isnot takeninto account is the culture within ASML. Therefore it could be that the culture within the companycauses competitionbetween teamsand individuals,but this is alsonot taken intoaccountduring theresearchandcouldberesearchedinthefuture.

vi

PrefaceThis report is the result of my graduation project for the Master of Science degree in InnovationManagement.IperformedtheresearchatASMLinVeldhoven.

Firstofall,IwouldliketothankeveryoneatASMLwhomademyinternshipenjoyable.MostimportantlyIwouldliketothankMarcoWeltenfortheguidancethroughouttheprojectandallofyourhoursspentonmy graduation project. You have taughtme a lot; not only on structuringmy project ormy self-inventedEnglishwords,butalsoonmyself.AlsoaspecialthankstoDuco,BasandRaf,forhelpingmealot with getting started at ASML, with the project, and providingmewith the right information andconnections.When I startedmyproject I did not expect to get so involved in the teamas an intern.ContinuousImprovementteam,thankyouforembracingmejustlikeanyotherteammember,listeningtomy graduation stories, the occasional ball throwing in the office and eating all the cakes I baked.Finally,Iwouldliketothankalltheengineersandteamleaderswhoparticipatedduringtheinterviews,meetingsandbrainstorms.

Next, Iwould like to thankmyuniversity supervisorsAlexAlblas, IsabelleReymenenLuukVerstegen.Alex,IwanttothankyouforyourguidancethroughouttheresearchandforfreeingupyourscheduletohavemeetingsandtoevencometoASMLforseveralmeetings.Youreallypushedmetoachievemoreandtaughtmealotondoingresearch.Isabelle,Iwanttothankyouforbecomingmysupervisoronsuchshortnotice, for supportingmeat theendofmyprojectandhelpingme to improve. Luuk, Iwant tothank you for helpingme tomake choices at the beginning of the project, for being critical and forhelpingmewiththeinterviews.

Iwouldalsoliketothankmyfriends,whohavealwayssupportedmeduringmystudies.Inparticularmyfriendsfromthe27thboardofUniPartnersEindhoven,myfriendsfromLeidenandthefriendsthatIgottoknowduringmystudieshereinEindhoven.IknowIcanalwayscountonallofyouandIamgratefulforhavingfriendslikeyou.

Furthermore,Iwouldliketothankmyboyfriend,Erik,forlisteningtomystoriesaboutgraduationeveryday, formotivatingme and buyingme chocolate. I am looking forward to the next period together,withoutoneofusbusywithgraduation.

Finally,Iamextremelygratefulformyfamilyandtheunconditionalsupportthroughoutmyentirelife.Youhavealwaysbeenthereformeandhaveneverjudgedme,sothankyouformakingitpossibleformetobecomewhoIam.FornowIamlookingforwardtothatwell-deservedholidayandtothenextchallengeatthestartofmycareer.

MisjaGelukEindhoven,May2017

vii

viii

Contents

Managementsummary........................................................................................................................ii

Preface...............................................................................................................................................vi

ListofFiguresandTables.....................................................................................................................x

Listofabbreviations............................................................................................................................xi

1. Introduction.................................................................................................................................1

1.1BusinessContext.............................................................................................................................................1

1.1.1ASML:thelargestsupplieroflithographymachinesworldwide........................................................21.1.2Thetestdepartment:Testingthemachinesbeforeshippingthemtothecustomer.........................2

1.1.3Directsupportline:TT5......................................................................................................................3

1.2Problemdefinition..........................................................................................................................................4

1.3Researchobjectivesandresearchquestions..................................................................................................51.4Thesisoutline..................................................................................................................................................7

2. TheoreticalFramework.................................................................................................................9

2.1Organizationallearning..................................................................................................................................92.2Knowledgetransferbetweenshiftteams.....................................................................................................11

2.3Driversandbarriersofknowledgetransferbetweenshiftteams................................................................122.3.1Knowledgecharacteristics................................................................................................................132.3.2Networkcharacteristics....................................................................................................................14

2.3.3Personalcharacteristics....................................................................................................................162.3.4ConceptualModel.............................................................................................................................17

2.4Designparameterslinkedtothedriversandbarriersofknowledgetransfer..............................................19

2.4.1Interaction........................................................................................................................................19

2.4.2Goals.................................................................................................................................................192.4.3Network............................................................................................................................................20

3. Methodology..............................................................................................................................21

3.1Methodologydiagnosis................................................................................................................................213.1.1Datacollection..................................................................................................................................22

3.1.2Datareduction..................................................................................................................................24

3.1.3Dataanalysis.....................................................................................................................................243.2Methodologysolutiondesign.......................................................................................................................24

3.2.1Designspecifications.........................................................................................................................25

3.2.2Brainstorm........................................................................................................................................25

ix

3.2.3Design:conceptsolutions,selectionanddetailing...........................................................................25

3.3Researchquality...........................................................................................................................................25

4. Results........................................................................................................................................27

4.1Resultsdiagnosis..........................................................................................................................................27

4.1.1Knowledgecharacteristics................................................................................................................314.1.2Networkcharacteristics....................................................................................................................33

4.1.3Personalcharacteristics....................................................................................................................36

4.1.4Otherknowledgetransferissues......................................................................................................374.1.5Empiricalmodelandevaluation.......................................................................................................38

4.1.6Designparameterslinkedtothedriversandbarriers......................................................................39

4.2Resultssolutiondesign.................................................................................................................................414.2.1Designspecifications.........................................................................................................................41

4.2.2Resultsbrainstorm............................................................................................................................42

4.2.3Conceptsolutions.............................................................................................................................424.2.4Conceptsolutionevaluationandselection.......................................................................................44

4.2.5Finalsolutiondesign.........................................................................................................................45

5. Conclusions&Discussion............................................................................................................48

5.1Answermainresearchquestion...................................................................................................................48

5.2Theoreticalimplications...............................................................................................................................495.3Practicalimplications...................................................................................................................................49

5.3.1Implicationsconcerningthesolutiondesign....................................................................................49

5.3.2Additionalrecommendations...........................................................................................................505.4Limitationsandfutureresearch...................................................................................................................51

AppendixA:Searchapproach............................................................................................................55

AppendixB:Stakeholderanalysisandinterviewees...........................................................................58

AppendixC:Interviewprotocols........................................................................................................60

AppendixD:Interviewquotes............................................................................................................63

AppendixE:OneNotefile...................................................................................................................68

AppendixF:ExamplefirstTT5meeting..............................................................................................70

x

ListofFiguresandTablesFigure1:EscalationlinesoftheTWINSCANFactory....................................................................................2Figure2:Preliminarycauseandeffectdiagram..........................................................................................5Figure3:Thesisoutline................................................................................................................................7Figure4:TheoreticalFrameworkorganizationallearning(Argote&Miron-Spektor,2011).......................9Figure5:Therelationshipbetweenassemblyhoursperaircraftandcumulativeoutput(Argote,2013).10Figure6:Conceptualmodelofthefactorsandtheireffectonknowledgetransfer.................................18Figure7:Researchapproachanddesign...................................................................................................21Figure8:Diagnosisprocess........................................................................................................................22Figure9:Solutiondesignprocess..............................................................................................................25Figure10:Processmapofhowadisturbanceisaddressed......................................................................31Figure11:NetworkpatternwithinTT5.....................................................................................................33Figure12:TiestrengthbetweenengineersofthefiveTT5shiftteams....................................................36Figure13:Finalempiricalmodel................................................................................................................39Figure14:Finalsolutiondesign.................................................................................................................45Figure15:Impactmodelfinalsolution......................................................................................................47Figure16:Stakeholderanalysis.................................................................................................................58Figure17:DNrequestsystem....................................................................................................................68Figure18:ExampleoftheOneNotefile.....................................................................................................69

Table1:Competencespershiftteam..........................................................................................................3Table2:CurrentshiftscheduleofTT5shiftteamswiththeworkinghourspershift..................................4Table3:Knowledgecharacteristics...........................................................................................................14Table4:Networkcharacteristics...............................................................................................................16Table5:Personalcharacteristics...............................................................................................................17Table6:Designparameterslinkedtothedriversandbarriersofknowledgetransfer.............................20Table7:Researchqualitytests,definitionsandtactics.............................................................................26Table8:Rawinterviewdata......................................................................................................................28Table9:Numberof shift transfersbetween theoutgoingand incoming shift teams in a ten-dayworkcycle...........................................................................................................................................................35Table10:Designparameterslinkedtothedriversandbarriersfoundinthediagnosis...........................40Table11:Designparametercomparisonofthecurrentsituation,conceptsolution1,2and3...............43Table12:Proposalsolutionevaluationandselection...............................................................................44Table13:Searchstrings.............................................................................................................................55Table14:Overviewinterviewees...............................................................................................................59Table15:Interviewquotes........................................................................................................................63

xi

ListofabbreviationsCT ContaminationandTemperatureDB DatabaseDE DevelopmentDN DisturbanceNotificationDO DeliveryOperationsEUV ExtremeUltraviolet FAT FactoryAcceptanceTest GH GreenHeartILL IlluminationprojectionKPI KeyPerformanceIndicatorKT KnowledgeTransferME MeasurementMT ManualTechnicianNXT NewGenerationTWINSCAN OL OrganizationalLearningOPL OnePageLessonOPTE OperatorTestPE ProductionEngineerRQ ResearchquestionRS/RH Reticlestage/ReticlehandlerSL SecondLineSQ SystemqualificationSW/EL Software/ElectricalTF TWINSCANFactoryTT5 TestTroubleshoot5-shiftVIS VolumeandInstallSupportWS/WH Waferstage/Waferhandler

1

1. IntroductionThe topic of organizational learning has received a lot of attention since the 1990’s (Argote, 2013;Argote & Miron-Spektor, 2011). During the first years researchers focused on understanding anddefining the concept of organizational learning. Organizational learning is defined as a change in theorganization’sknowledgethatoccursastheorganizationacquiresexperience(Argote&Miron-Spektor,2011).

During the past years research shifted towards explaining variations in the rates atwhich companieslearnfromexperience(Argote,2013;Argote&Epple,1990;Reagansetal.,2005).Oneexplanationforthesevariationsistheabilityofanorganizationtobenefitfromthepotentiallyvaluableknowledge.Thisabilityisdependingontheeffectivenessofforexampleknowledgetransfer.Organizationsthathavetheability to transfer knowledge effectively from one unit to another are found to bemore productive,moreinnovativeandmorelikelytosurvivethanorganizationsthatdonothavethatability(Argoteetal.,2000).

Itremainshoweverdifficulttolearnfromtheexperienceofothers,especiallyiftheteamsareworkinginshifts.Workinginshiftsisanemploymentpracticedesignedtoensurecontinuityinacompany24/7.Inshiftwork, a day is typically divided into different shifts,which are set periods of time, duringwhichdifferent employees perform their job. Each shift is distinct from the other and experiences its ownissues. It therefore provides individuals with an ideal opportunity to exploit knowledge generatedthrough experience of their colleagues (Argote, 2013; Bosua & Venkitachalam, 2015). However,knowledgeisdifficulttotransfertoothershiftsbecausetheonlymomentshiftworkersmeetwiththeircolleagues isduring thechangeofshift,also referredtoas the ‘handoff’or ‘shift transfer’.Moreover,theoutgoingshiftistiredandwantstogohome,whichcouldresultinforgettingtotellsomethinginthelimitedavailabletime.

Therearenonethelessmorebarriersaswellasdriverstoknowledgetransferbetweenteamsthatworkinshifts.Theobjectivesofthisresearcharetodiscoverthesedriversandbarriersofknowledgetransferbetweenteamsthatworkinshiftsandtodevelopasolutiondesignthatfocusesonthemainissueswithknowledge transfer at themoment. This chapter starts with a description of the business context inparagraph 1.1, afterwhich the scope of this research and the problem are defined in paragraph 1.2.Basedonthescopeandtheproblemdefinition,theresearchobjectivesandtheresearchquestionsaredevelopedandthesewillbediscussedinparagraph1.3.Inthefinalparagraph1.4theoutlineoftherestofthethesisisprovided.

1.1BusinessContextIn this paragraph the business context, also referred to as research context, is described in order toprovide insight in the research setting, the background of the company and the importance ofknowledgetransferinthebusinesscontext.Firstofall,adescriptionofthecompany,ASML,isprovided.Secondly,adescriptionofthetestdepartmentisgiven.Finally,adetaileddescriptionoftheresearchedteamisprovided.

2

1.1.1ASML:thelargestsupplieroflithographymachinesworldwideASMLisaDutchhigh-techcompanythatwasfoundedin1984.ThecorporateheadquarterislocatedinVeldhoven,theNetherlands.ASMLmanufactureslithographymachinesfortheproductionofintegratedcircuits,alsocalledchips,andiscurrentlythelargestsupplierintheworld.Tobeabletomaintainthisposition it is important forASML to keep innovating.Hence, learning fromotherpeople’s experienceandknowledgetransferhasbecomeincreasinglyimportantintheorganization.

ASML has different factories that are located all over the world. Two of the factories are located inVeldhoven: theTWINSCAN factory (TF) and theExtremeUltraviolet factory (EF). TFproducesbothXTandNXTsystemsthatuseanargonfluoridelaserandEFproducestheExtremeUltravioletsystems.Thisresearch is conducted in a support teamworking for the Test department of TF Delivery Operations(DO).Thedepartmentisdiscussedinthenextsection.

1.1.2Thetestdepartment:TestingthemachinesbeforeshippingthemtothecustomerMultipleteamsareresponsibleforthetestingofthelithographysystems.Thetestingofthelithographysystems takes place before the system is being shipped to the customer. The test department isresponsiblefordiminishingerrorsandfailuresandincreasingthematurityofthelithographysystems.Inorder to do so, two teams work closely together. Therefore teams communicate often and transferknowledgetoeachother.Thesetwoteamsarethefollowing:Testoperators(OPTE)anddirectsupport:Test Troubleshoot 5-shift (TT5). The next escalation line after direct support is the 1st line supportdepartment of Delivery Operations (DO): Volume and Install support (VIS). In DO the lithographysystems are tested, disassembled and packed to ship them to the customer. The final escalation lineafterVISis2ndlinesupportoftheentireTWINSCANFactory:Productionengineeringanddevelopment.TheyarelinkedthroughescalationlinesandthisisdepictedinFigure1.TheteamsofOPTE,TT5andVISarediscussedelaboratelyinthenextsections.

Figure1:EscalationlinesoftheTWINSCANFactory

Thefirstteamintheescalationlineistheteamoftestoperators(OPTE).OPTEperformstestssequencesonthelithographysystemstocheckifasystemisreadytobeshippedtotheclient.OPTEworksinshiftsproviding coverage 24/7. OPTE is ought to be a generalist and to understand the basics of everycompetence.Whenanerrororfailureatthelithographysystemoccurs,aDisturbanceNotification(DN)iscreatedandOPTEwilltrytosolveit. IfnosolutionisfoundinoneoftheproblemsolvingdatabasesandOPTEisnotabletosolveitwithinhalfanhour,theissueisdiscussedwithorescalatedtoTT5.

Thesecondteamisthedirectsupportline:theTestTroubleshoot5-shiftteam(TT5).TT5ispartoftheOPTEteam,coveringthesameshifts,andservesasthedirectsupportlayerforTest.TT5hasarisenasa

Testoperator(OPTE)

Directsupport(TT5)

1st linesupport(VIS)

2nd linesupport(PE/DE)

Testdepartment

DeliveryOperations

TWINSCANFactory

3

pilotteaminAugust2015toincrease24/7performancebycreatingtroubleshootcapacitytofillthegapof 1st line support (VIS)’ absence during the night and weekend, which will be further explained inparagraph 1.1.3. TT5 engineers are so-called specialist-generalists: the total of seven differentcompetencesaredividedoverthreeengineersperteamsuchthattheycanprovidefull-timesupportforeverycompetence.SincethethreeengineersinaTT5shiftteamhavedifferentresponsibilitiesandarespecialized in different competences, they can only exchange knowledgewith the engineers in othershiftteamshavingthesamecompetences.Thismeansthatknowledgetransferbetweentheengineerscanonlyoccuracrossshift teams.Hence,communicationandknowledgetransferwiththeothershiftteamsisimportant.AfteraDNisescalatedtoTT5,theytrytosolveit.WhenTT5isnotabletosolveitwithinfourhours,itisescalatedtoVIS.

ThethirdteamisVIS.VISisthefirstlinesupportforthefactoryandfortheinstallationinthefield.VISdoesnotworkin24/7shiftslikeOPTEandTT5,butVISprovidessupportbetween7.00and23.00duringtheweekandbetween7.00and15.00duringtheweekends.Theirshiftscheduleissetupespeciallytoenhance knowledge transfer. During each shift, three out of four teams are present and specialcompetencesmeetingsandissuediscussionsareorganizedduringtheirshifts.VISconsistsofgeneralist-specialists: each VIS engineer focuses on only one competence and has a lot of knowledge in thatspecificcompetence. IfVIScannotsolvethe issuewithineighthours,thenextsupport line,thefourthteam:secondlinesupport,iscontacted.TheissueishandedovertotherightdepartmentbySecondlinesupport,whichiseitherdevelopment(DE)orproductionengineering(PE),andasolutionissearchedforas long as it takes. DE and PE are specialists and they have the knowledge of a small part within acompetence.

1.1.3Directsupportline:TT5The research focuses on the direct support line: TT5, because knowledge transfer between the shiftteamsisdifficulttoachievesincetheyhardlyseetheircolleagues.TT5consistsoffifteenengineerswhoaredividedoverfiveshiftteamstogetherwithOPTE,thusthreeTT5engineerspershiftteam.EachOPTEteamhasasenior-,progress-andpeopleteamlead.

Eachshift teamconsistsof threeengineerswithdistinct responsibilitiesandknowledge.The technicalexpertise required for the complexASML lithography systems isdividedover sevenknowledgeareas,and these are referred to as competences. The seven competences are:Measurement (ME), Systemqualification (SQ), Wafer stage/wafer handler (WS/WH), Reticle stage/reticle handler (RS/RH),Illumination (ILL), Contamination and temperature (CT), and Electrical/Software (EL/SW). ThecompetencesdivisionperTT5shiftteamisillustratedinTable1.

Table1:Competencespershiftteam

TT5 Competences

Engineer1 ME&SQEngineer2 WS/WH&RS/RHEngineer3 ILL&CT&EL/SW

4

TT5works in the so-called “5-shift schedule”,which is the same asOPTE’s shift schedule. The 5-shiftschedule is set up such that there are five teamsworking in a shift schedule, and their shifts rotateforwardeverytwodays.Theengineersworksixshiftssuccessivelyandsubsequentlyhavefourdaysofweekend. InTable2 the schedule ispresented. The italic shifts are the shiftswhereVIS ispresentaswell,whicharereferredtoassupportedshifts.TheunderlinedshiftsaretheshiftswhereVISisabsent,theso-calledunsupportedshifts.DuringtheseshiftstheteamofTT5istheonlyteamtoprovidesupportforthefactory.Attheendofeachshift,halfanhourisdesignatedforshifttransfer.Table2:CurrentshiftscheduleofTT5shiftteamswiththeworkinghourspershift

Team1 Team2 Team3 Team4 Team5Monday 6.30-15.00 - - 22.30-07.00 14.30-23.00Tuesday 6.30-15.00 - - 22.30-07.00 14.30-23.00Wednesday 14.30-23.00 6.30-15.00 - - 22.30-07.00Thursday 14.30-23.00 6.30-15.00 - - 22.30-07.00Friday 22.30-07.00 14.30-23.00 6.30-15.00 - -Saturday 22.30-07.00 14.30-23.00 6.30-15.00 - -Sunday - 22.30-07.00 14.30-23.00 6.30-15.00 -Monday - 22.30-07.00 14.30-23.00 6.30-15.00 -Tuesday - - 22.30-07.00 14.30-23.00 6.30-15.00Wednesday - - 22.30-07.00 14.30-23.00 6.30-15.00As stated before, knowledge transfer between the shift teams is very important since every TT5engineerinashiftteamhasknowledgeofdifferentcompetences.Forexample,inshiftteamoneaTT5engineerhasknowledgeofthecompetencesMEandSQ,buttheothertwoTT5engineers inhisteamhaveknowledgeof theremaining fivecompetences.Therefore, tobeable todiscussTT5 issuesofhiscompetence,heor sheneeds to contact theTT5engineerwith the samecompetences in shift teamstwo, three, four or five. The importance of knowledge transfer in TT5 is clear. However, there areseveralissueswithtransferringknowledgebetweentheshiftteamsandthesearediscussedinthenextparagraph.

1.2ProblemdefinitionToanalyzeanddiagnosethemainproblematASML,severalmeetingswithengineersandmanagersofthe different teams are attended, discussions with engineers are held, and a shift including shifttransfers isobserved. It isconfirmedbyseveralpeoplethatknowledgetransferbetweenthedifferentteams,VIS,TT5andOPTE,occursoftenbecauseshiftsoverlap.ByworkingcloselytogetherwithVIS,theTT5engineerslearnandacquireknowledgefromVISthroughouttheday.Thisknowledgeistransferredina similarway fromTT5 toOPTE.However, theproblem is thathardlyanyknowledge is transferredbetweenthefiveshiftteamsofTT5.Themanagerofthetestdepartmentmentionedthisanditistheirdesiretoimprovethis.Theywanttoimprovethisbecauseitisimportantthatknowledgeistransferredbetween the engineers in shift teams to stay up-to-date with the latest developments and with theexperiencesoftheircolleaguesinothershiftteams.Accordingtotheengineers,newerrorsandfailuresatthelithographysystemsariseeverydayand,asmentionedbefore,thisknowledgetransferacrossthefive-shiftteamisthemainreasonfortheimplementationoftheTT5team.

5

ASML believes that the lack of knowledge transfer is predominately caused by the shift schedule, asdepictedinFigure2.Duetotheschedule,meetingsaredifficulttoplanandittakestheengineersalotofefforttotransferknowledgetotheothershiftteamsbecausetheyhardlymeet.However,apartfromthe shift schedule they do not know what other causes could exist or how to improve the currentsituation.Hence,thefollowingproblemstatementisdefined:

“There is a lack of knowledge transfer between teams thatwork in shifts andASMLdoes notknowhowtoimprovethis.”

Themainproblem,‘lackofknowledgetransfer’,isillustratedinFigure2inblue.ASMLiswellawareoftheeffectsofthe lackofknowledgetransferbetweentheshift teams,whicharedepicted inFigure2.During meetings mostly the effects were highlighted. Two examples are mentioned during thesemeetings.Thefirstoneisthefollowing:“theengineersredotheworkofthepreviousshiftsafterashifttransfer”, which refers to the first effect in Figure 2.This causes unnecessary system downtime. Thesecond example is the following: “The wheel is reinvented because solutions are not shared”,whichrefers to the second effect in Figure 2. An engineer found a solution for an issue at the lithographysystem, but did not share thiswith the other shift teams. Another shift team encountered the sameissue,butsincethesolutionwasnotshared,heorshehadtotroubleshootandfindthesolutionhimself.Thisresultsinunnecessarydowntimeofthesystem.Hence,thelackofknowledgetransferalsodirectlyleadstounnecessarysystemdowntime.InFigure2thepossiblecauses,thementionedproblemandtheeffectsaresummarizedanddepictedinapreliminarycauseandeffectdiagram.

Figure2:Preliminarycauseandeffectdiagram

Overall, the main problem is that ASML is not aware of the exact causes of the lack of knowledgetransfer and they do not know how knowledge transfer between shift teams can be improved. Theeffectof the lackofknowledge transfer isclear to them: systemdowntime.Theproblemdefinition isusedtodefinetheresearchobjectivesandtheresearchquestions.

1.3ResearchobjectivesandresearchquestionsTo be able to formulate the research questions, two objectives for this research are stated. The firstobjective is tounderstandthemainmechanismsandfactorsdrivingorhamperingknowledgetransfer

Lackofknowledgetransfer

Shiftschedule

Fewface-to-facemeetings

Reinventthewheel

Unnecessarysystem

downtime

Lotofefforttotransfer

knowledge

Redoingtheworkof

previousshifts

EffectsProblemPossiblecauses

6

between the teamsof TT5 (i.e. diagnosis). The secondobjective is to comeupwith a solution to theproblem and to provide recommendations to improve organizational practices at ASML (i.e. solutiondesign).Basedontheseresearchobjectives,thescopeandtheproblemstatement,thefollowingmainresearchquestionisformulated:

“HowshouldASMLadaptitsorganizationalandworkprocessesinordertoimproveknowledgetransferbetweenteamsthatworkinshifts?”

Tobeabletocompletelyandthoroughlyanswerthemainresearchquestion,theresearchisdividedintotwo parts, in linewith the two objectives of the research: (1) diagnosis and (2) solution design. Thediagnosisconsistsofaliteraturestudyandempiricalresearch.Foursub-researchquestionsweresetupin order to answer themain research question. Three sub-research questions (1.1, 1.2, and 1.3) arefocusedonthediagnosisandonesub-researchquestion(2)isfocusedonthesolutiondesign.Thesub-researchquestionsarediscussedinthenextsections.

The first research question of the diagnosis, 1.1, focuses on understanding the main concepts:organizationallearningandknowledgetransfer.Themechanismsrelatedtotheconceptsaredescribedand also the challenges are discussed. The answer to sub-research question 1.1 results in a detaileddescriptionoforganizational learningandknowledgetransfer, the linkbetweenthetwoconceptsandthemechanisms. The second part of question 1.1 is focused on understandingwhat the drivers andbarriersofknowledge transferbetweenshift teamsare.This results inanoverviewof thekeydriversand barriers in a conceptual framework. The first two questions are answered through an extensiveliteraturestudy.Thefirstandsecondresearchquestionsarethefollowing:

Sub-researchquestion1.1,diagnosis:“Whatisdescribedinliteratureaboutorganizationallearningandknowledge transfer and what are the key drivers and barriers of knowledge transfer between shiftteams?”

Thenext sub-researchquestion is focusedondevelopingdesignparameters linked to thedriversandbarriersthataretheresultofsub-researchquestion1.1.Thesedriversandbarriersarelinkedtodesignparameters,whicharecontextspecificaspectsthatcanbeinfluenced.Thedesignparametersareusedas input to createa solutiondesign. Thisquestionwill beansweredbydoinga literature review.Thesub-researchquestionisthefollowing:

Sub-researchquestion1.2,diagnosis:“WhatarethedesignparametersforthekeydriversandbarriersofknowledgetransferthatcanbeusedtocreateasolutiondesignforASML?”

Sub-research question 1.3, the last research question of the diagnosis, is aimed at analyzing andunderstandingthecurrentsituationatASMLthroughempirical research.Knowledgetransferbetweenshift teams is analyzed and the main drivers and barriers affecting knowledge transfer at ASML areidentified.Theresultsfromsub-researchquestion1.1areusedtodeterminewhichdriversandbarriersarepresent and affecting knowledge transfer. Thedesignparameters, as foundwhenanswering sub-research question 1.2, are adjusted to the present drivers and barriers at ASML. This results in an

7

empiricalresearchmodelandalistofdesignparametersthatcanbeusedforthesolutiondesign.Sub-researchquestion1.3canbestatedasfollows:

Sub-researchquestion1.3,diagnosis:“WhichdriversandbarriersasfoundinliteratureaffectknowledgetransferbetweenshiftteamsatASMLandwhataretherelateddesignparameters?”

Sub-researchquestion2,theresearchquestionofthesolutiondesign,focusesondevelopingasuitablesolution for ASML. Based on the outcomes of research question 1.3, a suitable solution is developedimprovingthemainbarrier(s)affectingknowledgetransferatASML.Therefore,sub-researchquestion2isthefollowing:

Sub-researchquestion2,solutiondesign:“Whichdesignparameterscanbe influencedandwhat isanappropriate solution design for ASML that would improve the main barrier(s) responsible for theinsufficientlevelofknowledgetransfer?”

Withtheanswerstothesefoursub-researchquestions,themainresearchquestioncanbeansweredinacompleteandthoroughway.Thelinkbetweentheresearchquestionsandthestructureofthethesisisdiscussedinthenextparagraph.

1.4ThesisoutlineThisparagraphdescribesthethesisoutline.Theremainderofthethesisisstructuredasfollows.Itstartswith the Diagnosis, which is divided into a literature study and empirical research. In Chapter 2TheoreticalFrameworkthetheoreticalbackgroundisprovidedbasedonanin-depthliteraturestudy.Inthis chapter sub-research questions 1.1 and 1.2 are answered.Chapter 3Methodology describes themethodology that is used for the diagnosis and the solution design. The empirical results of thediagnosisofthecurrentsituationandthebottlenecksatASMLarediscussedinthefirstpartofChapter4.1 Results - Diagnosis. Research question 1.3 is answered in this part. Based on the results of thediagnosis,asolutiondesignisdevelopedandtheresultsarediscussedinthesecondpartofChapter4.2Results - Solution design. The answer to research question 2 is presented in this paragraph. The lastchapter, Chapter 5 Conclusions and Discussion, presents the conclusions and an answer of themainresearch question, theoretical and practical implications and the limitations of the research togetherwithfutureresearchsuggestions.ThestructureofthethesistogetherwiththeresearchquestionsandchaptersisillustratedinFigure3.

Figure3:Thesisoutline

Diagnosis

Literaturestudy EmpiricalresearchRQ1.1,1.2 RQ1.3

Chapter2 Chapter3and4.1

Solutiondesign

RQ2

Chapter3and4.2

Conclusions,discussionandreflection

Chapter5

8

9

2. TheoreticalFrameworkThischapterprovidesthetheoreticalfindingswithrespecttothecontextandproblemoftheresearch.The search approach for the theoretical framework is described in detail in Appendix A. The chapterstartswithparagraph2.1,whichprovidesanintroductionofthemainconcept:organizationallearning.This subject is incorporated into this thesis as it gives insight on learning and how it occurs in anorganization. In paragraph 2.2 knowledge transfer is discussed and knowledge transfer between shiftteams is described. Paragraph 2.3 describes the expected drivers and barriers of knowledge transferbetweenshiftteams.Themostimportantdriversandbarriersaresummarizedintablesanddepictedinaconceptualmodel.Themaindriversandbarriersarelinkedtoinfluentialdesignparameters,whicharediscussedinthelastparagraph,paragraph2.4.

2.1OrganizationallearningThere are several definitions of organizational learning, but the most common definition is thatorganizational learning is a change in the performance that occurs as the organization acquiresexperience (Argote, 2013; Argote & Miron-Spektor, 2011). In Figure 4 the theoretical framework oforganizational learning is depicted. This framework is set up by Argote andMiron-Spektor (2011) toanalyzeorganizationallearning.

Figure4:TheoreticalFrameworkorganizationallearning(Argote&Miron-Spektor,2011)

An ongoing cycle occurs in which experience is converted into knowledge through organizationallearning processes (Argote, 2013; Argote & Miron-Spektor, 2011). Knowledge is created by theinteractionof taskperformanceexperiencewithin theactivecontextofanorganization.Experience isacquiredasthemembersofanorganizationperformtasksusingthetoolswithinanorganization.Thecumulativenumberoftaskperformancesistypicallyusedasthemeasureoforganizationalexperience(Argote,2013).Forexample,inthebusinesscontextofthisresearch,thecumulativenumberofXTandNXTlithographysystemsproducedwouldbeabasicmeasureoftheorganization’sexperience.

Organizationallearningoccursinacontext.Thiscontextincludestheexternalenvironmentalcontextinwhich the organization is embedded and the organizational context. The environmental contextcontains elements outside the organization, for example: competitors, clients, institutions andregulators. The environmental context influences the experience the organization accumulates. An

10

exampleisanorderforaproductorarequestforaservicefromthecliententeringtheorganizationandaffectinglearning.Theorganizationalcontextisdescribedbythecharacteristicsofanorganization.

Theorganizationalcontextisdividedintoanactivecontextandalatentcontext.Thedifferencebetweentheactiveandlatentcontextsistheircapabilityforaction.Theactivecontextconsistsofmemberswhouse tools thatperform tasks: theyareactive; theydo things. This is in contrast to the latent context,which isnot capableof action. Learningoccurs through the combinationof the latent contexton theactivecontext.Forexample,contextwherememberstrusteachotherpromoteorganizationallearning(Levin&Cross,2004).Thelatentcontextdefineswhothemembersofanorganizationare,whichtoolsthey use, and which tasks they perform. The elements of members, tools, and tasks and the linksbetween these elements are themainmechanisms throughwhich organizational learning occurs andknowledge is searched, created, transferred and retained. For example,moving individuals across anorganizationisamechanismforknowledgetransfer(Argote,2013).

Four interrelated learning processes play an important role in organizational learning: knowledgecreation, transfer, retention, and search (Argote, 2013). Knowledge creation is when a unit’sperformance increases from his own direct experience. Knowledge transfer describes the processthrough which the experience of one unit influences the performance of another unit. Knowledgeretentionoccurswhen the created knowledge is retained in the context of anorganization. The lastprocess,knowledgesearch,describesthesearchforknowledgeinthecontextofanorganization.

Oneofthebiggestchallengesoforganizationallearningistoobjectivelymeasureknowledge.Thebestwayistomeasurechangesinperformanceorpractices(Argote&Miron-Spektor,2011).Thesechangesaremeasured bymeasuring changes in speed, productivity or costs and these changes indicate thatknowledge is acquired and that learning occurred (Argote&Miron-Spektor, 2011). These changes inperformancefollowalearningcurve:asorganizationsproducemoreofaproduct,theassemblyhoursorunit costs typically decreaseat adecreasing rate (Argote, 2013;Argote&Epple, 1990). Experience intaskscreatesanincreaseinknowledgethatcanbeusedtoimprovetheperformanceofanorganization(Argote,2013).AnexampleofalearningcurvecanbefoundinFigure5.

Figure5:Therelationshipbetweenassemblyhoursperaircraftandcumulativeoutput(Argote,2013)

11

Argote(2013)statesthattheclassicformofanorganizationallearningcurveisthefollowing:

𝑦! = 𝑎𝑥!!

where𝑦! =thenumberoflaborhourspercompletedworkunitsa=thenumberoflaborhoursrequiredtocompletethefirstworkunit𝑥! =thecumulativenumberofunitsproducedthroughtimeperiodib=thelearningrate(thelargerthecoefficient,thefastereffortdecreasesduetolearning)

Fromthelearningrate(b)oneisabletocomputetheprogressrate(p).Theprogressrateisthedecreaseinaverageeffortwhencumulativeexperiencedoubles.Thisrateiscomputedasfollows:

𝑝 = 2!

Significantdifferencesarefoundintheratesatwhichcompanieslearnfromexperience(Argote,2013;Argote & Epple, 1990; Reagans et al., 2005). Given the variation in learning outcomes, the recentresearchhasshiftedtowardsexplainingvariationsinlearningrates(Reagansetal.,2005).Reagansetal.(2005)statethattherateatwhichcompaniesbenefitfromtheirownexperienceisinfluencednotonlybyindividualexperienceandtheabilityoforganizationalmemberstocoordinatetheiractivities,butalsobytherateatwhichindividualsbenefitfromknowledgeaccumulatedbyothers.

Argote(2013)statesthatthesignificantdifferencesintheratesatwhichcompanieslearncanbemainlydeterminedbyanorganization’sabilitytotransferandretainknowledge.Understandingthedynamicsof knowledge transferalsoprovides insights for knowledge retention,becauseanorganization isonlyabletotransferknowledgewhenitisretained(Argote,2013).

2.2Knowledgetransferbetweenshiftteams“Theexperienceofothersrepresentsapoolofknowledgeatanindividual’sdisposalthatisdistinctfromtheknowledgeheorshehasaccumulateddirectly”(Reagansetal.,2005,p.871).Howmuchindividualsbenefit fromknowledgeaccumulatedbyothersdependson the rateof knowledge transferwithinanorganization(Reagansetal.,2005).Knowledgetransferisreferredtoas“theprocessthroughwhichoneunit(e.g.,individual,group,department,anddivision)isaffectedbytheexperienceofanother”(Argote&Ingram,2000,p.151).Mechanismstotransferthisknowledgeareforexampleallowingindividualstoobserve the performance of others, providing opportunities to communicate with other units,transferringdocuments,ortransferringexperiencedpersonnel(Argote,2013).Whenanorganizationisable to effectively transfer knowledge between different units, it increases its performance and it ismoreproductive thanorganizations thatarenotable to transferknowledgeeffectively.However, theproblemis thatorganizations find itdifficult tobesuccessfulatknowledgetransfer (Argote& Ingram,2000).Understandinghowknowledgetransfercanbefacilitatedwhileminimizingproductivitylosscansignificantlyimprovetheperformanceofanorganization.

12

VanWijk et al. (2008)makeadistinctionbetween inter- and intra-organizational knowledge transfer.The first type, inter-organizational knowledge transfer, concerns the knowledge transfer between atleasttwodifferentorganizations.Thelattertype,intra-organizationalknowledgetransfer,isknowledgetransferwithinanorganization.Thisresearchisfocusedonintra-organizationalknowledgetransfer.

Thedistinctionbetweenthetwo ismadebecauseof thedifferent factorsandcharacteristicsaffectingthe transferofknowledge (Argote,2013).Forexample,asharedvision isa factor thatcould facilitateknowledge transfer. This factor is easier to achieve within an organization than between twoorganizations (VanWijket al., 2008).Anotherexample is theeaseof establishingnetworkswithinanorganization,while connectivity between organizations is less straightforward because it needs to beestablishedacrosstheboundariesoftheorganization(Inkpen&Tsang,2005).

Within intra-organizational knowledge transfer, the level of analysis can be on individual level or onteam level. The level defines the factors and characteristics that affect knowledge transfer. In thisresearch, the level of analysis is knowledge transfer between shift teams of one overarching team.Working in shifts is an employment practice designed to ensure continuity in a company across alltwenty-four hours of the clock every day of the week. In shift work, a day is typically divided intodifferentshifts,whicharesetperiodsoftime,duringwhichdifferentemployeesperformtheirjob.Theworkpracticeisusedincapital-intensiveindustrieswhereequipmentorsystemsaretooexpensivetobekept idle formuch of the time or in industrieswhere continuous processes are needed, such as thepoliceorambulanceservices.Thereareseveralconditions forknowledgetransferata teamlevelandthesearediscussedinthenextparagraph.

2.3DriversandbarriersofknowledgetransferbetweenshiftteamsThis paragraph identifies the conditions for knowledge transfer between shift teams; the so-calleddriversandbarriersofknowledgetransfer.Inordertoimproveknowledgetransferbetweenshiftteams,itisimportanttounderstandwhichfactorsinfluencethetransferofknowledge.Numerousfactorswerefound to drive or impede knowledge transfer. The factors can be divided over four differentcomponents: knowledge characteristics (Argote, 2013; Nonaka, 1994; Szulanski, 1996), organizationalcharacteristics(Argote,2013;VanWijketal.,2008),networkcharacteristics(Inkpen&Tsang,2005;VanWijketal.,2008),andpersonalcharacteristics (Szulanski,1996).However,noneof these factorshavebeenlinkedtoknowledgetransferbetweenshiftteamsbefore.Whichfactorsandcharacteristicsplayanimportant role in a situation depends on the level of analysis and the research context. At anorganizational level of analysis, different factors play a role than at an individual level of analysis(Argote, 2013). This research focuseson a teamand individual level and therefore theorganizationalcharacteristicsarenottakenintoaccount.Thismeansthatthedriversandbarriersaresubdividedintothe following three categories: (1) knowledge characteristics, (2) network characteristics, and (3)personalcharacteristics.Foreachtypeofcharacteristicmultiplefactorsareexpectedtohaveaneffectonknowledgetransfer.Theseareelaboratedinthenextparagraphs.Attheendofeachparagraphthereasonwhythesefactorsthatareexpectedtoplayaroleinknowledgetransferbetweenshiftteamsishighlighted.

13

2.3.1Knowledgecharacteristics:tacitnessandcomplexityofknowledgenegativelyinfluenceknowledgetransferThefirstcharacteristics influencingthetransferofknowledgearethecharacteristicsoftheknowledgeitself.Szulanski(1996)arguesthatthecharacteristicsofknowledgearethemostsignificantdeterminantof the occurrence of a transfer. In literaturemany definitions of knowledge are given, but often it isdefined as a justified personal belief (Nonaka, 1994; King, 2009). There is some confusion about thedifferencebetweenknowledgeand information.These termsareused interchangeably,but there isaclear distinction between the two. Information is a commodity that is able to create knowledge.Knowledgeiscreatedbyinformationanditistiedtoaperson’sbeliefsandcommitment(Nonaka,1994).The characteristics of knowledge can be divided into two different factors: Knowledge tacitness andknowledgecomplexity.Thesearefurtherdiscussedinthenextsections.

Firstof all, the tacitnessof theknowledge influences the transferof it.Various researchers suggest adistinction between two types of knowledge: explicit knowledge and tacit knowledge (King, 2009;Nonaka,1994;Polanyi,1966).Explicitknowledgeisknowledgethatcanbeput intowords,documentsorotherexplicitforms.Thismakesiteasytotransfertoanotherindividual.Explicitknowledgehowever,onlyshowsthetipoftheicebergofwhatsomeoneknows(Nonaka,1994).Tacitknowledgeisdescribedby‘knowingmorethanyoucantell’(Polanyi,1966).Itislocatedinaperson’smindanditisdifficultorsometimes even impossible to articulate (Nonaka, 1994). Nonaka (1991) states that tacit knowledge“consistspartlyof technical skills – thekindof informal,hard-to-pindown skills captured in the term‘know-how’” (p.98) and it is typically acquiredon the job. Tacit knowledge canbe transferredby forexample working together closely and by showing how something is done. However, as knowledgebecomesmore tacit, it requiresgreater interactionand socializationbetween individuals tomake thetransfersuccessful(Hansen,1999;Santoro&Saparito,2006).Tacitknowledgealsotakestimetoexplainandlearn,andthereforeitslowsdownitstransfer(Argote,2013;Levin&Cross,2004;Szulanski,1996;Zander&Kogut,1995).

Secondly,thecomplexityoftheknowledgeisprobabletoinfluencethesuccessofthetransfer(Argote,2013).Knowledgeisdeterminedascomplexwhenitconsistsofmanycomponentsthatcloselyinteract(Simon,1962).Attemptstotransfercomplexknowledgearefoundtoleadtoadecreaseinproductivityfor the recipient of the knowledge in contrary to simple knowledge (Galbraith, 1990). Complexknowledgedoes not floweasily through anorganization,while simple knowledgedoes. Complex andmoderate complex knowledge is best transferredwhen the social ties between individuals are strong(Hansen,1999;Sorensonetal.,2006).

When linking this to the research context, it is expected that tacitness and complexity of knowledgeinfluence knowledge transfer between the shift teams of ASML. Since knowledge tacitness andcomplexityarebothfactorsthatcannotbechanged,othercharacteristicscomeinplaytoenhancethetransferoftacitandcomplexknowledge.Asstatedbefore,bothfactorsrequirealotoftimeandcloseinteractiontotransfer.Thereisonlylimitedtimefortheshiftteamstotransferknowledgeandtobuilda strong relationship. Therefore it is expected that it will be difficult to transfer tacit and complex

14

knowledgebetween the shift teams.Anoverviewof the two factorsof theknowledge characteristicstogetherwithanexplanationandrelatedkeyreferencesareillustratedinTable3.

Table3:Knowledgecharacteristics

KnowledgecharacteristicsFactor Explanation Operationalization RelatedkeyreferencesTacitness Knowledgewithahighdegree

oftacitnessismoredifficulttotransfer,becauseitisdeeplyrootedinapersonandrequirescloseinteractionandtime

Degreetowhichtheknowledgeisaskillandcapturedbytheterm“know-how”.

Argote(2013);Hansen(1999);King(2009);Levin&Cross(2004);Nonaka(1991);Nonaka(1994);Santoro&Saparito(2006);Szulanski(1996);Zander&Kogut(1995)

Complexity Knowledgewithahighdegreeofcomplexityismoredifficulttotransfer,becauseitdoesnotfloweasilythroughanorganizationanddependsonthetiestrengthbetweenindividuals

The number of closelyinteracting components perpieceofknowledge.

Argote(2013);Galbraith(1990);Hansen(1999);Simon(1962);Sorensonetal.(2006)

2.3.2Networkcharacteristics:thenetworkstructure,asharedvision,strongtiestrengthandtrustfacilitateknowledgetransferThe second characteristics to influence knowledge transfer are the network characteristics.Networksprovide individuals with opportunities to transfer knowledge and receive knowledge from others(Inkpen&Tsang,2005).InkpenandTsang(2005)suggestthreedifferentdimensionswithinthenetworkcharacteristicsthat influenceknowledgetransfer: (1)structural, (2)cognitive,and(3)relational.Thesedimensionsarediscussedinthenextsections.

StructuraldimensionThestructuraldimensiondescribesthestructureofanetwork.Thisincludesthenumberofrelationshipsamong individualsandtheconfigurationoftheserelationships(Inkpen&Tsang,2005;VanWijketal.,2008). A high number of relationships with other individuals increases the likelihood of access topotentiallyinterestingknowledge(Reagans&McEvily,2003;VanWijketal.,2008).Theconfigurationofa network determines the pattern of relationships between individuals. This impacts the ease ofknowledge transfer by the amount of available contact and the accessibility of members of theorganization(Inkpen&Tsang,2005).Italsoprovidesforopportunitiestoexchangeknowledgewitheachother(Argote,2013).

CognitivedimensionThe cognitive dimension describes the resources within a relationship that provide a sharedunderstandingamongthemembersofanorganization (Inkpen&Tsang,2005;VanWijketal.,2008).Ashared vision promotes mutual understanding and provides a bonding mechanism that facilitates

15

knowledge transfer. Shared goals for example contribute to a shared vision. A shared vision can bedetermined by the degree to whichmembers of an organization share a common understanding toachieveorganizationaltasksandoutcomes.

RelationaldimensionThe relational dimension refers to the aspects of the relationships between individuals and theoutcomes (Inkpen&Tsang,2005).Thisdimension isdivided into twodifferent factors: tiestrengthandtrust(VanWijketal.,2008).Thefirstfactoroftherelationaldimensionisthetiestrength.Tiestrengthresembles the closeness of a relationship between two individuals, and this typically increaseswhenpeople interact frequently (Hansen, 1999; Levin&Cross, 2004; Van Wijk et al., 2008). Ties play animportantroleinthestructuraldimension.Inliterature,adistinctionismadebetweenstrongandweakties.Strongtiesare foundtoplayan importantrole in thetransferof tacitknowledge(Hansen,1999;Santoro & Saparito, 2006). Social network ties facilitate the transfer of knowledge, especially whenthesetiesarestrongandtrusting.

Thesecondfactoroftherelationaldimensionistrust.Alackoftrustcanleadtocompetition,resultinginhamperedknowledgetransfer,whilethebenefitoftrustisthefacilitationofknowledgetransfer.Trusthasabig impactonthewillingnessofnetworkmemberstotransferknowledge(Inkpen&Tsang,2005).When individuals trust their colleagues, this contributes to a free exchange of knowledge and thetransfer of useful knowledge (Levin&Cross, 2004). Trust also makes knowledge transfer less costly,becauseitreducesconflictsandtheneedtoverifyinformation(Levin&Cross,2004).Trustisafactorthatgrowsovertime.Thelongerandthemorepeopleworktogether,thebettertheygettoknoweachotherand thus trust each other. This also means that the positive effect of trust on knowledge transferdevelops over time. Trust affects knowledge transfer in two ways. It affects the transfer from theperspectiveofthesourceandoftheperspectiveoftherecipient.Fromthesource’sperspective,alackoftrustleadstolessknowledgetransferbecausetherecipientisnotperceivedasreliablebythesource.Fromtherecipient’sperspective,asourcethatiscapableandtrustworthyismorelikelytoinfluencethebehavior of the recipient. The effect of perceived reliability is revealed in the implementation of thetransferred knowledge (Szulanski, 2000). Furthermore, the lack of trust from the perspective of therecipient could cause the Not-Invented-Here (NIH) syndrome. The NIH syndrome is defined as “thetendencyofaprojectgroupofstablecompositiontobelieveitpossessesamonopolyofknowledgeofits field,which leads it to rejectnew ideas fromoutsiders to the likelydetrimentof itsperformance”(Katz&Allen,1982,p.7).

These factors are expected to have an influence on knowledge transfer within the business context,becausethenetworkstructureofmultipleshiftteamsisdifferentfromateamworkingthesameshift.There is limited time available between the shifts for knowledge transfer, and therefore greaterinteractionandbuildingstrongsocialtiesaredifficulttoachieve.Thusthenetworkstructureisexpectedto affect the cognitive and relational dimensions, because when teams hardly see each other, it isdifficulttobuildatrustingandstrongrelationshipandcreateasharedvisiontogether.AnoverviewofthefourfactorsofthenetworkcharacteristicstogetherwithanexplanationandrelatedkeyreferencesareillustratedinTable4.

16

Table4:Networkcharacteristics

NetworkcharacteristicsFactor Explanation Operationalization RelatedkeyreferencesNetworkstructure

Thestructureofanetworkdeterminestheeaseofknowledgetransfer,theaccesstoknowledgeandprovidestheindividualswithopportunitiestotransferknowledge

Amountandpatternofrelationshipsinanetwork

Argote(2013);Inkpen&Tsang(2005);Reagans&McEvily(2003);VanWijketal.(2008)

Sharedvision

Asharedvisionpromotesamutualunderstandingandprovidesabondingmechanismwhichwillfacilitateknowledgetransfer

Thedegreetowhichnetworkmembersshareacommonunderstandingandapproachtotheachievementofnetworktasksandoutcomes

Inkpen&Tsang(2005);VanWijketal.(2008)

Tiestrength

Whenthetiestrengthisstrongerknowledgetransferiseasierbecausepeopleknoweachotherbetterandtherelationshipismoretrusting

Theclosenessofarelationshipandthefrequencyofinteractionbetweenindividuals

Hansen(1999);Levin&Cross(2004);Reagans&McEvily(2003);Santoro&Saparito(2006);VanWijketal.(2008)

Trust Knowledgeisnottransferredtosomeonewhodoesnothavetherightintentionswiththeknowledge.Alackoftrustcouldalsoleadtotheknowledgenottobeusedbythereceiveroftheknowledge

Thedegreetowhichthesourceorreceiverofknowledgeisperceivedasreliable

Inkpen&Tsang(2005);Katz&Allen(1982);Levin&Cross(2004);Szulanski(2000);VanWijketal.(2008)

2.3.3Personalcharacteristics:themotivation,disseminativecapacityandabsorptivecapacityofanindividualinfluenceknowledgetransferThelastcharacteristicsthatinfluenceknowledgetransferarethepersonalcharacteristics.Learningandknowledgetransferoccurthroughindividualsinorganizations(Argote,2013).Whenanindividualisforexample not willing or not capable of transferring knowledge to others, this will impact the level ofknowledgetransfer.Thepersonalcharacteristicsthatareexpectedtoinfluenceknowledgetransfercanbedividedintothreefactors:(1)themotivation,(2)thedisseminativecapacity,and(3)theabsorptivecapacity.

Firstofall,motivationwillinfluenceknowledgetransfer.Individualsaremotivatedintrinsicallyaswellasextrinsically (Osterloh & Frey, 2000). Intrinsic motivation is a motivation based on self-desire, whileextrinsicmotivationcomes from influencesoutsideofan individual.Motivationcanbeaffectedbyanincentive to compete orwork togetherwith the recipient (Szulanski, 1996; Szulanski, 2000). Intrinsicmotivationiscrucialforthetransferoftacitknowledge(Osterloh&Frey,2000).Anexampleofintrinsicmotivation is the fearof losingownership, thewillingness tohelpothersor the feelingof superiority.Extrinsic examples are that he or she is not rewarded for it or that he is unwilling to take time andresources to transfer the knowledge. A lack of motivation could withdraw people from transferringknowledge,butcouldalsocauseproblemswiththeimplementationofknowledge.Thisoccurswhenthereceiverof theknowledge is reluctanttoacceptknowledgefromtheoutside, the ‘Not InventedHere’(NIH)syndrome,alsodiscussedinparagraph2.3.2.

17

The second factor is the disseminative capacity of an individual. This refers to the capacity of anindividual to translate the knowledge into a language that the recipient can understand (Reagans &McEvily, 2003) and todiffuse the knowledge through thenetwork (Parent et al., 2007). This ability isneededtosuccessfullytransfertheknowledgetoanotherindividual.

The last factor is the absorptive capacity of an individual. Absorptive capacity refers to the ability ofrecipientsofknowledgetoassimilateandapplyit(Cohen&Levinthal,1990;Szulanski,1996;Tsai,2001).Individuals find it easier to absorb knowledge in areas that lie in their expertise (Reagans&McEvily,2003).When an individual is able to absorb the knowledge that is transferred to him, the transfer iseasierthanwhentheindividualdoesnothavethisability(Reagans&McEvily,2003).

Linkingthesefactorstothecontextofthisresearch,motivationcouldbeafactorinfluencingknowledgetransfer.Given the shift schedule, it requireseffortand time to transfer knowledge fromone shift toanotherbecauseiteitherneedstobecodifiedoranoverlappingmomentneedstobefoundtobeabletotransfertheknowledgeverbally.Thismightwithholdan individualtoputeffort in it.However,alsothedisseminativeandabsorptivecapacitiesareimportantforknowledgetransfer,andthesecapacitiesarecloselyrelatedtotrust, tiestrengthbetween individualsandthepatternofanetwork(Reagans&McEvily,2003).Thereforethesefactorsarealsoexpectedtoinfluenceknowledgetransferbetweenthedifferentshiftteams.AnoverviewofthethreefactorsofthepersonalcharacteristicstogetherwithanexplanationandrelatedkeyreferencesareillustratedinTable5.

Table5:Personalcharacteristics

PersonalcharacteristicsFactor Explanation Operationalization RelatedkeyreferencesMotivation Whenindividualsarenotmotivated,

theycanwithdrawfromknowledgetransferornotusetheknowledgethatistransferredtothembyothers

Thedegreetowhichindividualsarewillingtotransferknowledgetoothersorwillingtolearnfromothers

Osterloh&Frey(2000);Szulanski(1996);Szulanski(2000)

Disseminativecapacity

Thecapacityofanindividualtotranslateknowledgeintoanunderstandablelanguageandtodiffusethisknowledge,resultsineasierandmoresuccessfulknowledgetransfer

Thedegreetowhichanindividualiscapabletotransferknowledge

Parentetal.(2007);Reagans&McEvily(2003)

Absorptivecapacity

Whenanindividualisabletoassimilateandapplytheknowledgethatistransferredtothem,knowledgetransferiseasier

Thedegreetowhichanindividualisabletoabsorbandusethetransferredknowledge

Cohen&Levinthal(1990);Reagans&McEvily(2003);Szulanski(1996);Tsai(2001)

2.3.4ConceptualModelBasedon the results from the theoretical framework, a conceptualmodel isdeveloped. Themodel isdepictedinFigure6.Therearedifferentfactorsexpectedtoinfluenceknowledgetransferinthespecificcontext of this research. These factors are divided over three types of characteristics: (1) knowledgecharacteristics,(2)networkcharacteristicsand(3)personalcharacteristics.

18

Figure6:Conceptualmodelofthefactorsandtheireffectonknowledgetransfer

Forthefirstcharacteristics,theknowledgecharacteristics,twofactorsareexpectedtohaveaninfluenceonknowledgetransferacrossshiftteams:thetacitnessofknowledgeandthecomplexityofknowledge.Themore tacit knowledge is, themoredifficult it is to transferandclose interaction is requires.Verycomplexknowledgeisalsodifficulttotransfer,becauseitdoesnotfloweasilythroughanorganizationandrequiresacloseinteractionandstrongtiestrengthbetweenindividuals.

For the second characteristics, the network characteristics, four factors are responsible: (1) networkstructure,(2)sharedvision,(3)tiestrengthand(4)trust.Thefirstfactor,networkstructure,referstothepatternandnumberofconnectionswithinanetwork.Thisimpactstheeaseofknowledgetransferandprovides individuals with opportunities to transfer knowledge. The second factor, shared vision,promotes a mutual understanding among individuals and provides a bonding mechanism. This willfacilitate knowledge transfer. The third factor, tie strength, describes the strength of a relationshipbetween individuals.When the tie strength is strong, knowledge is easier to transfer becausepeopleknow each other and trust each other better thanwith aweak tie strength. The last factor, trust, iscloselyrelatedtothis.Whenpeopletrusteachother,theywilltransfermoreknowledgetoeachotherandusetheknowledgethatistransferredtothem.

Forthelastcharacteristics,thepersonalcharacteristics,threefactorsareofimportance:(1)motivation,(2)disseminativecapacityand(3)absorptivecapacity.Thefirstfactor,motivation,isimportantinordertoinitiateknowledgetransferandtousetheknowledgethatistransferredtothem.Thesecondfactor,disseminative capacity, refers to the capability of an individual to translate knowledge into anunderstandablelanguageandtodiffusethisknowledge.Whenindividualsareabletodothis,knowledgetransfer is likely to be easier andmore successful. The last factor, absorptive capacity, refers to theability of an individual to assimilate and apply the knowledge that is transferred to them. This alsomakesknowledgetransfereasier.

ExperienceteamA

ExperienceteamB

PerformanceteamB

PerformanceteamA

4

3

2

1

- Knowledgecharacteristics:- Tacitness (-)- Complexity (-)

- Networkcharacteristics:- Networkstructure(+/-)- Sharedvision (+)- Tiestrength(+)- Trust(+)

- Personalcharacteristics- Motivation(+)- Disseminative capacity(+)- Absorptivecapacity(+)

Knowledge transfer:2&3Knowledge creation:1&4

19

2.4DesignparameterslinkedtothedriversandbarriersofknowledgetransferThisparagraphwilldiscuss thedesignparameters thatarerelatedto thedriversandbarriers thatarepresented in theprevious threeparagraphs.As statedbefore,noteverydriverof knowledge transfercan be influenced or changed. Therefore, influential design parameters are developed which willenhance or stimulate the driver. The design parameters are logically grouped together. For thisresearch, three parameter groups are created: (1) interaction, (2) goals, and (3) network. The designparameterspergrouparediscussedinthenextsections.

2.4.1InteractionThefirstgroupconcernstheinteractionbetweenpeople.Fourdesignparametersarepartofthisgroup:mechanism,frequency,formalityandtime.Thefirstdesignparameterismechanismofinteraction.Thisconcerns the type of mechanism that is used to interact. Examples of mechanisms are documents,databases,ormeetings.Thisfirstdesignparameterinvolvesmultiplefactorsdiscussedinthepastthreeparagraphs:tacitness(paragraph2.3.1),anddisseminativeandabsorptivecapacity(paragraph2.3.3).Asstatedbefore, tacitknowledge isdifficult towritedown,but it iseasier toshow.Asstatedearlier thedisseminativeandabsorptivecapacitiesareaffectedbythemechanismofinteraction.Insomecasesitiseasiertowritesomethingdownandinothercasesitiseasiertoexplainsomethingface-to-face.

The second design parameter is the frequency of interaction. This is expected to influence trust, tiestrength, network structure, and shared vision, which are explained in paragraph 2.3.2. People caninteract at a low frequency or at a high frequency. Themore people interact, the better they get toknoweachother. Therefore trust and tie strengthareexpected tobeaffectedby the frequency. Theinteraction frequency also determines the network structure, as stated before. The final factor to beinfluencedbythefrequencyisthesharedvision.Asharedvisioniscreatedwhenindividualsspendmoreandfrequenttimetogetherinwhichtheyworktogetheronissuesandexchangeknowledge.

Thethirddesignparameteristheformalityoftheinteraction.Peoplecaninteractinaformalwayorinan informal way. This is expected to affect tie strength, trust (paragraph 2.3.2), and motivation(paragraph2.3.3).Whenindividualsinteractinformally,theygettoknoweachotherinadifferentwayand increase the social tie strength and trust. On top of that, the motivation of individuals will beaffectedsincetheyknoweachotherpersonallyandwillbemotivatedtohelpeachotherandtointeract.

Thelastdesignparameteristheavailabletimetointeract.Thisparameterisexpectedtoinfluencethetacitness and complexity (paragraph2.3.1), shared vision, tie strength and trust (paragraph2.3.2). Totransfer tacit and complex knowledge, more time is required. When individuals spend more timetogether,theywilldevelopasharedvisionsincetheydiscussandtalkmore.Trustandtiestrengtharefactorsthatbuildovertimeandarethereforealsoexpectedtobeaffectedbythisparameter.

2.4.2GoalsThesecondgroupconcernsthegoalsofanindividualorateam.Twodesignparametersarepartofthisgroup: thegoal levelandauniformwayofworking.Thefirstdesignparameterrelatedtogoals is thelevelof thegoals.Goalscanbeseton individual level,butalsoon team level.Thisaffects thesharedvision(paragraph2.3.2)andmotivation(paragraph2.3.3).Teamgoalshelpindividualstoworktogether

20

toachievesomethingandtogeteveryoneonthesamepage.Itisalsoexpectedtoincreasemotivation,sincetheyhavetoworktogethertoachievesomethingandarethereforemoremotivatedtocooperate.Theseconddesignparameterofgoalsisauniformwayofworking.Thisconcernstheagreementsthataremadeandtheclearprocessesthatexistwithinanorganization.Thishelpscreatingasharedvisionforindividuals,asstatedinparagraph2.3.2.

2.4.3NetworkThe lastgroup isnetwork.Twoparametersare created for thisgroup:network stabilityand size.Thefirstparameterofthenetworkisthenetworkstability.Anetworkisstablewhennotmanychangesaremadeandpeoplestay.Thisinfluencesthenetworkstructure,tiestrength,andtrust.Whenpeopleleaveorwhennewpeoplearehired,thenetworkstructureandpatternchangessincenewconnectionsneedto be developed, as stated in paragraph 2.3.2. The parameter will also affect tie strength and trust,becausetheseareaspectsthattaketimetobuild.

Theseconddesignparameterofthenetworkisthenetworksize.Anetworkcanbelarge,butitcanalsobesmall.Thisaffectsthenetworkstructure,trustandtiestrength(paragraph2.3.2).Whenanetworkislarge,itwillbemoredifficultforindividualstocreateconnectionswiththerightpeople.Italsoaffectstrust and tie strength, becausewhenanetwork is larger itwill bemoredifficult tobuild a strong tiestrengthandtrust.

Table 6 presents an overview of the involved barriers and drivers, the parameter group and designparameter,anexplanationperparameter,andtheparameterrange.Thebarriersanddriversarelinkedtothepreviousparagraphs,indicatedbythenumberoftheparagraph.Forexample:“2.3.1”.

Table6:Designparameterslinkedtothedriversandbarriersofknowledgetransfer

Involvedbarriersanddrivers Designparameter

Explanation Parameterrange

Tacitness(2.3.1),disseminativecapacityandabsorptivecapacity(2.3.3)

Interaction–Mechanism

Typeofmechanismusedtointeract

Examples:document,database,meeting

Trust,tiestrength,networkstructureandsharedvision(2.3.2)

Interaction–Frequency

Thefrequencyatwhichpeopleinteractwitheachother

Low–High

Tiestrengthandtrust(2.3.2),motivation(2.3.3)

Interaction–Formality

Degreetowhichtheinteractionisformal

Informal–Formal

Tacitnessandcomplexity(2.3.1),andsharedvision,tiestrengthandtrust(2.3.2)

Interaction–Time

Availabletimetointeract xminutes

Sharedvision(2.3.2),andmotivation(2.3.3)

Goal–Level

Levelofgoalsthataresetup Individual–Team

Sharedvision(par.2.3.2) Goal–Uniformwayofworking

Agreementsonauniformwayofworking

Unclear–clear

Networkstructure,tiestrengthandtrust(2.3.2)

Network–Stability

Thefrequencyatwhichemployeesleaveandarehired

Low–High

Networkstructure,trustandtiestrength(2.3.2)

Network–Size

Thesizeofanetwork Small–Big

21

3. MethodologyThe researchdesign is basedon the regulative, empirical, and the reflective cyclesof vanAkenet al.(2007) and is depicted in Figure 7. The approach and results of the first step of the regulative cycle,problem definition, are already discussed in Chapter 1. The second step of this cycle, diagnosis, isdividedintofoursmallersteps:literaturestudy,datacollection,datareductionanddataanalysis;thisiscalled the empirical cycle. The results of the literature study are discussed in Chapter 2. Themethodologytotheremainingthreestepsisdescribedindetailinparagraph3.1.ThediagnosisresultsinanempiricalmodelcontainingthedriversandbarriersofknowledgetransferatTT5.Ontopofthat,thedesign parameters are adjusted based on the interview results. The results of the diagnosis arediscussedinchapter4.1.Themethodologyforthethirdstepoftheregulativecycle,solutiondesign,isdiscussedinparagraph3.2.Theresultsofthesolutiondesignarediscussedinparagraph4.2.Thefourthstepof the regulative cycle is theevaluationof the researchand solutiondesignand this follows thereflectivecycle.Theevaluationisdividedintotwosmallersteps,namelyreflectionanddocumentation.The research is reflected and evaluated such that the generalizability of the results is verified. TheresultsofthereflectionarediscussedinChapter5.Thequalityoftheresearchisdiscussedinparagraph3.3.

Figure7:Researchapproachanddesign

Theunitofanalysisisknowledgetransferbetweenshiftteams.Theresearchdoesnotlimititselfsolelytotheshifttransferanditsdifficulties,butitalsofocusesonotherknowledgetransfermechanisms,e.g.meetings, databases and e-mails. Only knowledge transfer between different shift teams of TT5 isanalyzedsinceithasbeenstatedthattherearenotalotofdifficultieswithinashiftteamorbetweenthedifferentdepartments.

3.1MethodologydiagnosisDuring the second phase of the research design, diagnosis, the current situation is analyzed, theproblemisverifiedandthecausesoftheproblemaredetermined.Fourstepsaretakeninordertodothis.Firstofall,anextensiveliteraturestudyisdone.TheresultsofthisstudyaredescribedinChapter2.Secondly,data iscollectedthroughtheuseofmultiplesources.Thirdly, thecollecteddata is reduced.Finally,thereduceddataisanalyzed.Thediagnosisresultsinanempiricalmodelanddesignparameters.These results areusedas input for the thirdphase: solutiondesign; themethodologyof the solutiondesignisdiscussedinparagraph3.2.AnoverviewofthedifferentstepstakenforthediagnosisandthetwodeliverablesattheendoftheprocessisdepictedinFigure8.

1.Problemdefinition

2.Diagnosis

3.Solutiondesign

4.Evaluation

4.1Reflection

4.2Documentation

2.2Datacollection

2.3Datareduction

2.4Dataanalysis

Regulativecycle Empirical

cycle

Reflectivecycle

2.1Literaturestudy

22

Figure8:Diagnosisprocess

The choice for a research design depends on the following three conditions: the type of researchquestion,thecontrolof theresearcheroverthebehavioralevents,andthefocusoncontemporaryorhistorical phenomena (Yin, 2009). The qualitative case study research design is particularly suited forthisresearchbecauseofthreereasons:(1)theaimoftheresearchistoidentifyhowtheexperienceofoneteamaffectstheperformanceofanotherteamandwhichfactorsplayanimportantroleinthis,(2)there is limited control of the researcher over knowledge transfer, (3) the researched events arecontemporary. Qualitative research allows the researcher to examine the issues with knowledgetransferindetail.Thequalitativecharacteroftheresearchisespeciallysuitablebecausethefieldisnotmatureenoughyet;onlylittleresearchonknowledgetransferbetweenshiftteamshasbeenconducted.

3.1.1DatacollectionThe first step of this phase is data collection. Case studies typically rely on multiple sources ofinformation. This is referred to as triangulation and it improves the reliability and validity of theresearch.Semi-structured interviewswereconductedasaprimarydatasource. Interviewsarechosenbecause itnotonlyprovides the researcherwithan in-depthunderstandingof thecurrent issues,butalsoaimsatexploringotherdifficultieswithknowledgetransferandunderstandingthemotivesbehindactions. The results and statements from the interviews are complemented by other data, such asprojectpresentationsandtheshiftschedule.

3.1.1.1InterviewsThemostimportantstakeholdersoftheprojectareinterviewedthroughsemi-structuredinterviews.Byusing semi-structured interviews, the interviewer has the possibility to bring up new ideas or to askmore questions based on an interviewee’s response. Before setting up the interview protocols, theintervieweesareselected.

IntervieweesAstheunitofanalysisisknowledgetransferwithinTT5,theengineersofTT5arethemaininterviewees.TheteamofTT5consistsfifteenengineers:fiveshiftteamswiththreeengineersperteam.However,atthe time of interviewing several teams only consisted of two engineers and a reorganization in thedepartmenttookplace.Tokeepitbalancedandhaveagoodratioofdifferentcompetencesandteams,thereischosentoselecttwoTT5engineersperteam,thustenTT5engineersintotal.

OntopofinterviewswiththeTT5engineers, interviewswithmanagementofthetestdepartmentandseveralkeystakeholdersfromtheVISdepartmenttookplace.TheselectedmanagersarethemanagerofthetestdepartmentandthreeteammanagersofdifferentOPTEteamswithdifferentresponsibilities.The interviews with test department management are conducted to gain an understanding of theirexpectationsoftheresearchandtheirperspectiveoftheissueswithknowledgetransfer.TheinterviewswithVISare conducted tounderstand theirwayofworkingandknowledge transferbetweenVISand

Datacollectio

n

Datareduction

Dataanalysis

Empiricalmodel

Designparameters

Literaturestudy

23

TT5, because TT5 is currently trained by VIS and is adopting their way of working. The stakeholderanalysisandthelistoffinalintervieweesisdepictedinAppendixB.The interviewees are split into two different groups: the engineers and management. This is donebecause of the different roles of the interviewees concerning knowledge transfer over shifts. Theengineers are the ones who transfer the knowledge, while themanagers are the ones whomanageknowledgetransferandtheprocessesandcorrespondingagreements.

InterviewprotocolThe interviewsareconductedbyusingpredefinedprotocols toguardthereliabilityandvalidityof theresearch(Yin,2009).Thereliabilityandvalidityarefurtherdiscussedinparagraph3.3.Basedonthetwodifferentgroups,theengineersandmanagement,twodifferentprotocolsaresetup.Theinterviewsaresemi-structured. Both protocols are in English, but most of the interviews were conducted in Dutchbecause Dutch people found it easier to express themselves in their native language. Both interviewprotocols startwithan introductionof the interviewerand theproject, thegoalof the interviewandasking permission to record the interview. The first protocol, for the engineers, focuses on twomainthemestounderstandthecurrentprocessofknowledgetransfer.Thesethemesarethefollowing:whatis being transferred and how is it transferred. This is done to get an insight of how much there istransferredatthemoment,whatthemotivesareandwhatthedifficultieswithknowledgetransferare.Theinterviewisbuiltfromacombinationofopenandclosedquestionsprovidingroomforintervieweestocomeupwiththeirowninsights.Thesecondprotocol,formanagement,focusesontheagreementsthat have been made about knowledge transfer for TT5. The interview protocols can be found inAppendixC.

The intervieweeswere invitedforthe interviewsthroughcompanye-mail.Thee-mailstatedthemainobjectives of the interview and optional dates to plan the interview. Out of the sixteen invitedrespondents,allrespondentsaccepted.Allinterviewswereconductedduringthedayshiftsandwithinatimespanoffiveweeks.

3.1.1.2ComplementarydataTheadditionaldataisusedtocomplementandsupportstatementsoftheinterviewees.Threestepsaretaken in order to collect this data. The first step is talking to Test department managers and teamleaders and going throughold project presentations anddocuments about TT5. This is done to get abetterunderstandingoftheteamofTT5,thehistoryofTT5andtheircurrentwayofworking.NotesaremadeduringthemeetingsandtheseareusedtoprovideadetaileddescriptionofTT5.Togetherwithateamleaderandtwoprojectleadersaprocessmapofthewayofworkingofthetestdepartmentissetup,asthiswasnotyetavailableatASML.

Secondly,theshiftschedulesofTT5,VISandTestareanalyzed.Sinceoneofthebiggestproblemswithknowledgetransferistheshiftschedule,theactualproblemswiththescheduleareanalyzedbylookingforpattersintheshifttransfersandsequences.Therelationbetweenpattersandissuesinthescheduleandthestatementsoftheengineersduringtheinterviewsarelinked.

24

Finally,theprojectmeetingsofotherTT5relatedprojectsareattendedtogaininsightintheseongoingprojects, their impactandscope.Someof theseprojects forexample influencethewayofworkingoftheengineersorhaveoverlapwiththisresearch. It is therefore importanttostayup-to-datewiththedevelopments of these projects. During all meetings minutes are made of statements that areinterestingfortheresearch.

3.1.2DatareductionThe second step of this phase is data reduction. The semi-structured interviews were recorded andtranscribed.Duringthe interviewsopenquestionswereasked,thusthe intervieweesprovideda lotofinformation.Thismadeitdifficulttotakenotesandaskquestionsatthesametime.Thereforethereisdecidedupfronttorecordalloftheinterviewsandtoonlyjotdownnotesofinterestingoroutstandingstatements.Bydoingthattheinterviewerisactivelyengagedduringtheinterviewsandafterwardshasthepossibilitytolistentotherecordingsmultipletimes.Duringsomeinterviewstheintervieweedriftedoff-topicandforexamplestartedtalkingindetailaboutfunctionalitiesofthelithographysystem.Theseoff-topicstatementswereexcluded fromtranscription.Asstatedearlier, the interviewsarebuilt frommultipleopenquestionsprovidingroomforintervieweestocomeupwithadditionalfactorsratherthanpushingtheintervieweestowardstheresultsoftheliteraturestudy.Consequently,noteveryinterviewcoveredtheexactsametopics.

3.1.3DataanalysisThelaststepisanalyzingthereduceddata.Thereduceddataiscodedusingapredefinedsetofcodesandadditionalcodeswereaddedthroughtheopencodingmethod.Thepredefinedcodesarebasedonthethreetypesofcharacteristic:knowledge,networkandpersonalcharacteristics.AmatrixinMicrosoftExceliscreatedwiththepredefinedcodesononeaxisandtheintervieweesontheotheraxis.Foreachcode corresponding quotes of the interviewees are chosen and added to thematrix. The predefinedcodes however did not cover all recorded data and the engineers mentioned additional issues.Therefore additional codes were created. Next, the quotes are summarized into a main phrase orkeyword such that a clear overview is created. The results are compared cross case, such that anunderstandingofthemainconceptsinfluencingknowledgetransferwithinTT5isgiven.Theresultsarepresented in an empirical model and are discussed in paragraph 4.1, which is evaluated with themanagerandteamleadersofthetestdepartment.Theresultingdriversandbarriersare linkedtothedesignparametersthatweresetupintheliteraturestudyandadditionalparametersareaddedtocovereveryfactor.

3.2MethodologysolutiondesignWhenthebusinessproblemanditsmostimportantconceptsaredeterminedandvalidated,asolutionisdesignedinthethirdphaseoftheresearch.Thesolutionneedstotacklethemostimportantcause(s)oftheproblem(VanAkenetal.,2007).Duringtheinterviewssomeresistancefromseveralengineerswasnoticed.Therefore,amethodinvolvingtheengineersischosentocreateasolutiondesign.ThesolutiondesignprocessisbasedonthegeneralmodelfordesignprocessofVanAkenetal.(2007).Theprocessconsistsof fivesteps: (1)developingthedesignspecifications for thesolution, (2)brainstormsessionswith the engineers to collect data, (3) designing the concept solutions based on the input of the

25

brainstorm,(4)evaluationandselectionoftheconceptsolutions,and(5)detailingtheconceptsolutionintoafinalsolution.ArepresentationofthedifferentstepsisillustratedinFigure9.

Figure9:Solutiondesignprocess

3.2.1DesignspecificationsTheinterviewswithmanagementareusedtosetupdesignspecificationsforthesolutiondesignandtodiscuss their expectations of the solution. The protocol can be found in Appendix C. Based on theirstatements, four typesofdesign specificationsare setup followingVanAkenetal. (2007): functionalrequirements,user requirements,boundaryconditions,anddesignrestrictions.The finalsetofdesignspecificationsisstatedinparagraph4.2.1.

3.2.2BrainstormAfter the requirements are set up, data is collected throughabottom-upapproach involving the TT5engineers. Brainstorm sessions with the TT5 engineers are organized to actively involve them. Thisapproach is chosen for two reasons. First of all, it is expected to diminish resistance, because theengineersareactivelyinvolvedthroughouttheprocess.Secondly,theengineershavetheknowledgeoftroubleshooting and working in shifts. Therefore they know what is important to transfer to theircolleaguesandwhatisnot.

Thesecondpartofthebrainstormisfocusedoncreatinginputforconceptsolutions.Theengineersaredivided into three groups mixing up the teams and competences. Each group will brainstorm andelaborateoneideatosolvethecurrent issuewithknowledgetransfer, i.e.tacklingtherootcauses.Attheendof thebrainstormeach idea ispresentedanddiscussed.Thethree ideas fromthebrainstormand the general brainstorm session are used as input for the researcher to set up three conceptsolutions.

3.2.3Design:conceptsolutions,selectionanddetailingTodevelopasuitablesolution,theresearchercreatedthreeconceptsolutionsbasedontheinputfromthe engineers, the design parameters derived from literature and the engineers and on practicalsolutionsfoundinliterature.Toevaluatethethreeconceptsolutions,ameetingwiththeentireteamofTT5engineersisorganized.Theengineersandresearchersetupevaluationcriteriaandtheseareusedtoevaluatethesolutions.Attheendofthemeetingoneconceptsolutionisselected.

Based on the outcome of the solution evaluation, the concept solution is detailed and elaboratedtogetherwiththeengineers.MeetingsareorganizedwitheachTT5teaminordertoaddmoredetailtothesolutionandtoincorporateeveryone’sopinion.Theendresultisadetailedsolutionthatisreadyforimplementation.

3.3ResearchqualityAresearchissupposedtorepresentalogicalsetofconclusionsandthereforeitisimportanttojudgethequalityoftheresearchaccordingtoseveraltests(Yin,2009).Testingthevalidityandthereliabilityofa

BrainstormDevelopingspecifications

Evaluationand

selectionDetailing

Designingconceptsolutions

Design

26

research is a way to judge the quality. The validity of results refers to the relationship betweenconclusions and the way they have been generated. There are three types of validity to test this:constructvalidity,internalvalidityandexternalvalidity(Yin,2009).

Thetestofconstructvalidityresolvesthequestionwhetherthecorrectoperationalmeasuresareusedfor theresearchedconcepts (Yin,2009).Threetacticsareused: (1) themainconceptsof theresearchare defined and operationalized, (2) the raw data is presented in this research before drawingconclusions,and(3)multiplesourcesofevidenceareusedtobuildclaims.

Thesecondtestisthetestofinternalvalidity.Thistestdeterminestowhatextenttheuncoveredcausalrelationisjustified(Yin,2009).Threetacticsareused:(1)thefindingsoftheresearcharediscussedwithmanagementofthetestdepartmentandsupervisorsintheorganization,(2)peoplewithdifferentroles,teams and competences are involved in the research and (3) many evaluation sessions andpresentationsareorganizedthroughouttheresearchtokeepeverystakeholderup-to-dateandaskfortheiropinions.

The final validity test is the test of external validity. This test focuses on the generalizability of theresearch to other situations or organizations and the conclusion is reached by the use of theory,reflection of the research and by discussing the research with colleagues andmanagement of otherdepartmentswithinASML.Nexttovaliditytests,thereliabilityoftheresearchneedstobetested.

The reliability test determineswhether repetition of the research results in the same outcomes (Yin,2009).Itensurestheminimizationoferrorsandbias.Fourcasestudytacticsareappliedtoguardthis:(1) interviewprotocolsaresetuppriortotheinterviewsandusedduringtheinterviews,(2)notesaretakenduring allmeetings, evaluations andbrainstorms, (3) a clear chainof evidence is provided thatgives an detailed description of what has been done, and (4) the raw data is separated from theprocessed data. In Table 7 an overview of the four different tests, a definition of each test and theappliedtacticsthatareusedinthisresearchareprovided.

Table7:Researchqualitytests,definitionsandtactics

Test Definition AppliedtacticsConstructvalidity

Determiningwhetherthecorrectoperationalmeasuresfortheresearchedconceptsareused

- Definingandoperationalizingthemainconceptsintheresearch

- Presentingrawdatabeforedrawingconclusions- Usingmultiplesourcesofevidencetobuildclaims

Internalvalidity

Determiningtheextenttowhichtheuncoveredcausalrelationisjustified

- Discussionofinterviewresultswithmanagementandsupervisors

- Evaluationsessionswithengineersandmanagement- Involvepeoplewithdifferentroles,teamsandcompetences

Externalvalidity

Generalizabilityoftheresearchtoothersituationsandorganizations

- Useoftheory- Reflection- Discussionoftheresearchwithcolleaguesandother

departmentsReliability Demonstrationthatrepetition

oftheresearchresultsinthesameoutcomes

- Useofinterviewprotocols- Takingminutesduringmeetings,evaluationsandbrainstorms- Detaileddescriptionofwhatisdone;chainofevidence- Separaterawdatafromprocesseddata

27

4. ResultsThischapterpresentstheresultsoftheempiricalresearch.Itisdividedintotwoparts:theresultsofthediagnosis, which are discussed in paragraph 4.1, and the results of the solution design, which areprovidedinparagraph4.2.

4.1ResultsdiagnosisThe aim of this paragraph is to understand the current knowledge transfer process and the factorsinfluencingknowledgetransferwithinTT5.Thefirstthreeparagraphsaretheresultsofthedriversandbarriers basedon the theoretical framework: the knowledge characteristics: knowledge tacitness andcomplexity(paragraph4.1.1),thenetworkcharacteristics:networkstructure,sharedvision,tiestrengthand trust (paragraph 4.1.2) and the personal characteristics: motivation, disseminative capacity andabsorptivecapacity(paragraph4.1.3).Ontopofthedriversandbarriersofthetheoreticalframework,three additional factors are found during the diagnosis. These three factors enhance the theoreticalframework and will be discussed in paragraph 4.1.4. The three factors are the following: knowledgetransfermechanisms,knowingwhatothersknow,andknowledgetransferprocess.Thefifthparagraph,Paragraph4.1.5,presentsanddiscussesthefinalempiricalmodel.Thefinalparagraph,paragraph4.1.6,presents the adjusted design parameters that will be used to set up a solution design for the TT5knowledgetransfer.

Table8,dividedoverthreepages,presentstheresultsfromtheinterviewswiththeTT5engineers.PerTT5 engineer a summarized statement is presented in the table with a quote reference number,indicated by “Q#”. The corresponding quotes are to be found in AppendixD. The rawdata from theinterviewsisfurtherdiscussedintheparagraphsthatfollow.

28

Table8:Rawinterviewdata

Interviewee1 Interviewee2 Interviewee3 Interviewee4 Interviewee5 Interviewee6 Interviewee7 Interviewee8 Interviewee9 Interviewee10Kn

owledg

echaracteristic

s

Tacitness Feeling,experience,learning-by-doing(Q1,Q2)

Withexperienceyouapproachasolutionfaster,itisafeeling(Q3)

Thinkingpatternbehindsolvingissues(Q4)

Commonsense,youlearntoanalyze,wayofthinking(Q5)

Commonsense,youcantroubleshootoryoucan’t(Q6)

Feeling,learningbydoingandbyexperience(Q7,Q8)

Theknowledgeisinmyhead,difficulttoexplain(Q9)

Trouble-shoot,skills,personal(Q10)

Learning-by-doing(Q11)

Learning-by-doing,approachingissues(Q12)

Complexity Learningfromunknownissuesthatrequireanalysis,takingrisks,thinking(Q13)

Analysisofissues,thinkingabouteverypossibility,manypossibilities(Q14)

Lotofknowledgeavailableindatabasesabouteveryelementinthesystem,butunstructured(Q15)

LearningfromcomplexissuesandtalkingtoVIS(Q16)

Everythingiscomplex,newmachinetechnologiesandnewsystemseachyear(Q17)

Unknownissuesrequirethinkingabouteverypossibility,youdiscovernewthings(Q18)

NewDN'srequirefurtheranalysis,availableknowledgeindatabasesisunstructuredandalot(Q19)

x Newissuesrequireanalysisandlookingatpossibilities,importanttoknowhowthemachineworkstosolveissues(Q20)

x

Networkcharacteristic

s

Networkstructure

Knowledgetransferonlytoowntestteam(Q21)

x KnowledgetransferonlytomyTT5shiftteam(Q22)

x x Teamwithinateam,butcoreteamistheshiftteam.Conflicting(Q23)

x TT5isateam,butateamthatworksinshifts(Q24)

x x

Sharedvision Knowledgetransferonownrequest,meetingwithTT5wouldbegood,talkabouttroubleshooting(Q25)

Changingway-of-working,everycompetenceownway-of-working(Q26)

x x Othercompetenceshaveotherway-of-working(Q27)

Differentbackgroundsandcompetition,noteamgoalorapproach,differentway-of-workingteamsandCompetence(Q28,Q29)

Differencesshiftteams,differentways-of-working(Q30)

Everyonehasownwayoftroubleshoot-ing(Q31)

x x

Tiestrength x Onlyknowledgetransfertoownshiftteam(Q32)

TT5isjustfounded,2shiftteamsyouhardlyseeandIdon'ttransfertothem,manytransferswithother2teams,Iknowthem,Itrustthem(Q33)

Hardlyshifttransferswithothershifts,noknowledgetransfer.Onlytomyshiftteam(Q34)

x Goodtransferwithshiftteamsyouseeoften(Q35)

Personalandgoodbondwithtwoshiftteamsyouseeoften,nobondwiththeothertwo(Q36)

Goodtransferwithtwoshiftteamsyouseeoften,becauseyoupersonallyknowthem.Differentwiththeothertwo(Q37)

Nodifferencebetweentheteamsyouseemoreoftenwiththeothers(Q38)

Lessdiscussionbecauseyouseethoseteamsless(Q39)

29

Interviewee1 Interviewee2 Interviewee3 Interviewee4 Interviewee5 Interviewee6 Interviewee7 Interviewee8 Interviewee9 Interviewee10Networkcharacteristic

s

Trust x x Lesstrustbecauseyouseethemlessoften,bottleneck,hasseriousconsequences(Q40)

x Somedon’tunderstandwhatishappening(Q41)

Negativecompetition,tryingtobebetterthantheothers,mightstopyoutotransferknowledge(Q42)

x Moreandlongerdiscussionwithshiftsyouseeoften,receivemoreknowledgefromthem(Q43)

x xPe

rson

alcha

racteristic

s

Motivation Itrytotransferasmuchaspossible(Q44)

Shortshifttransferwithsomeshifts(Q45)

TransferwhenIknowsomeoneisinterested,Idon'tsharewithpeopleIdon'tknow(Q46)

Afteryourshiftyouwanttogohomeassoonaspossible,especiallyafteranightshift(Q47)

ShortshifttransferbecauseIwanttogohomeaftermyshift(Q48)

Discussionwhenyouhavetimeandsomethinginteresting,butsometimesyouwanttogohomeaftershift(Q49)

Motivationtoshare,butnotsureiftheotherisinterestedorknowsit.Afternightshiftyouwanttogohome(Q50)

Shortshifttransfersbecausenobodylikesstayinganhourextraaftertheirshift(Q51)

x Acentralknowledgepointwouldbenicetoexchangeknowledgewithothershifts(Q52)

Disseminativecapacity

Sometimesdifficulttoexplainknowledge(Q53)

Idoclearandshorttransfers(Q54)

Italkandsharealot,butmyadministrationbeforeshifttransfercouldbebettertokeepitshortandclear.Couldbeanissueforsome(Q55)

x NoteveryDNtransferiscompleteandthesame(Q56)

EveryTT5'eriscompetent,butalsodifferent.Iwillgoindiscussion,butnoteveryonewilldothat(Q57)

Mysharingmethodsarebad,IamnotstructuredandthenIdon'tshareitatall(Q58)

x Generalknowledgeisdifficulttotransfer.Youcouldforgetthingsafteryournightshiftbecauseyouaretired(Q59,Q60)

Afterabusyshiftthetransferismoredifficultandhecticthanafteraquietshift(Q61)

Absorptivecapacity

Complexissuesareprocessedbutalsoquicklyforgotten.Easiertoabsorbknowledgeface-to-facethanreadingit(Q62)

Toomuchinformationissometimesnotprocessed(Q63)

Experiencedthatsomeonedidnotreallyunderstandwhatwastransferred(Q64)

Mosttransferredknowledgeisunderstood.Onlydifficultwhenyoutransferonpaperbecausethereisnofeedback(Q65)

Thingsdisappearinyouremailinboxbecauseyougettoomuch(Q66)

Preferencefortalkingtosomebody,70%ofcommunica-tionisnon-verbal.Withreadingyoumissthatnon-verbalpart(Q67)

Sometimesitisreallynotunderstoodbyotherswithlessexperience(Q68)

EveryTT5'erunderstandsit,butsometimespeopleforgetthings.Nofeedbackfrom(Q69)

x x

30

Factors Interviewee1 Interviewee2 Interviewee3 Interviewee4 Interviewee5 Interviewee6 Interviewee7 Interviewee8 Interviewee9 Interviewee10

Additio

nald

riversa

ndbarrie

rs

Knowledgetransfermechanisms

Bestisface-to-facetransfer,emailisambiguous.Alsofeedbackandquestionsviaemailisdifficult.Emailsdisappear,toomanyperday(Q70)

Shifttransfertotalkaboutpastshift.Sometimesemail,butifitistoolongIdon’treadit.Facetofaceisgood(Q71)

Lotofemailsperday.Withfacetofacetransferyouseeifpeopleunderstandit,withemailthereisnofeedback(Q72)

Hardlyanyshifttransfers,emailsusedasshifttransferandnoproblemswithit(Q73)

Transferisviarareemailandface-to-face.Manyemailsaday,thingsdisappear.Restofthetransferdonethroughtalking.IssuewithVISmeetingsduetoschedule(Q74)

Onlyknowledgetransferisduringshifttransfer.NoTT5meetings,talkingisbetter.Receivealotofemailsdaily,nothingcapturesmyattention(Q75)

Sometimesemail.DuringshifttransferopenDN’sandsometimesmore(Q76)

Allknowledgetransferinshifttransfer.Sometimesemailbecauseeveryonewillgetit,evenwhentheyareill(Q77)

Onlyseepeopleduringshifttransfer.Occasionallyemail.IfitisnewforVIS,discussioninaVISmeeting.DoesnotreachentireTT5(Q78)

Occasionallyemail,talkaboutopenDN’sduringshifttransfer(Q79)

Knowingwhatothersknow

x x Sometimessurprisedthatpeopleknowsomething.Maybeeverybodyknowsitbuttheydon’tshare(Q80)

x Nooverviewofwhoknowswhat.OccursthatpeopleknowsomethingIneverheardof(Q81)

x Idon’tsharewithotherteamsbecausetheymightalreadyknow,Idon’twanttospamthem(Q82)

x I’dhavetoknowwhattheyknowmorethanme(Q83)

x

Agreementsknowledgetransfer

Knowledgetransferispoorandseldom.Noprocessoragreements,allonownrequest.(Q84)

Therearenoagreements,onlyknowledgetransfertoownshift(Q85)

Notawareofagreementsonwhattotransfer(Q86)

Thereprobablyareagreements,can’trecallthem(Q87)

Don’tknowtheagreements,probablycommonsense(Q88)

HandoverofopenDN’sduringshifttransfer(Q89)

Noagreements(Q90)

Noagreementsonwhatandhowtotransferknowledge(Q91)

Don’tthinkthatthereareagreements,justhandoveropenDN’s(Q92)

Notsureofagreements,justhavetobeclear(Q93)

31

4.1.1KnowledgecharacteristicsThisparagraphdescribestheresultsfromthedatacollectionconcerningtheknowledgecharacteristicsoftheTT5engineers.TobeabletounderstandthetypeofknowledgeoftheTT5engineers,aprocessmap of how a disturbance is addressed (DN) in the test department is created. The process map isdepictedinFigure10.Thedescriptionoftheprocessisdescribedinthefollowingsections:

Theoperator(OPTE)runstestsonthemachines.Thetestskeeprunning,untilanissueoccurs.Whenanissueoccurs,OPTEcreatesaDN,afterwhichasolutionissearchedfor.Ifasolutionisfound,anactionplan,thathasbeenmadetosolvetheDN,isexecuted.TheactionplanmightcontaintasksthatOPTEisnotallowedorabletoperformandthatshouldbebydirectsupport(TT5)or1stlinesupport(VIS).Whenthesolution thatwas found is thecorrect solution for theDN, the issue is solvedafterallactionsareexecuted. IfthesolutiondoesnotsolvetheDN,anewactionplanwillbecreatedor itwillbehandedovertodirectTT5.TheotheroptionisthatnosolutionwasfoundbyOPTEandtheDNisimmediatelyhandedovertoTT5.

Directsupport(TT5)checksifitisaknownornewDNandifitisknown,itissentbacktoOPTEtogetherwithanactionplan.Ifitisnew,theVISDatabase(DB)ischeckedtoseewhethertheDNiscompletelyneworwhethertheDNhasoccurredbeforebutthereisnotyetanactionplanforit.

Figure10:Processmapofhowadisturbanceisaddressed

Initiate

OperatorOPTE

DirectsupportTT5

1st linesupportVIS

2nd linesupportD&E/PE

y

n

New₀

Newᵢ

Analyze

DN

Solved

Analyze Al lowed/abletosolvei t?

Analyze

Handover

Handover

Handover

y

n

n

VISDBnKnown?

y

Foundsolution?

AP

Createactionplan

Executeactionplan

AP

Al lowed/abletosolvei t?

Createactionplan

Executeactionplan

AP

y

Executeactionplan

Executeactionplan

Createactionplan

Executeactionplan

Executeactionplan

Executeactionplan

y

n

Correctsolution?

Solved

Solved

Solved

32

According to the TT5 engineers, this is the partwhere they learn themost: the analysis. This part isindicatedintheredboxinFigure10.TheDNisanalyzedandthereisdecidedwhethertheengineerisallowedand/orabletoperformthetaskstosolvetheDN.Iftheengineerisallowedandabletosolveit,anactionplaniscreatedandthisishandedovertoOPTE.WhenOPTEcannotexecutetheactionplan,TT5executesit.WhenTT5isnotableand/orallowedtosolvetheDNandcreateanactionplan,theDNishandedovertoVIS.

1stlinesupport(VIS)troubleshootstheDNanditischeckedwhethertheVISengineerisallowedand/orabletosolvetheDN.WhentheVISengineer isableandallowedtosolve it,anactionplan iscreated,whichishandedoveragaintoOPTEifitisdoableforthem,andisexecutedandtheDNissolved.WhenVISisnotabletosolvetheDN,itishandedoverto2ndlinesupport,whichiseitherDevelopment(D&E)orProductionEngineers(PE),andthisdepartmentcontinuestroubleshootinguntiltheDNissolved.

The disturbance resolution process as shown in Figure 10, enables us to describe the knowledgecharacteristics, which are divided into two factors: knowledge tacitness and knowledge complexity.Thesetwofactorsarediscussedinthenexttwoparagraphs.

4.1.1.1KnowledgetacitnessKnowledgetacitness refers to thedegreetowhichknowledge isdescribedasaskillandiscapturedbytheterm“know-how”.Tounderstandhowtheengineersgainmostoftheirknowledgeandwhatkindofknowledgethisis,theyareaskedtodescribetheirworkprocessesandtheknowledgethat isimportanttohavetoperformtheirwork.

Most engineersmentioned that they learnbydoing; they learn from troubleshooting and solving theissuesthemselves.Theyconfirmedthatthepartwheretheylearnthemostiswhenanissueisnewandtheyhavetoanalyzeit,asdepictedintheredsectioninFigure10.Accordingtotwoengineersitcomesdowntocommonsense:onecaneithertroubleshootoronecannot.Whenmoreexperienceisgained,afeeling for solving DN’s is developed and an own way of troubleshooting is created. With moreexperiencetheengineerswillsolveissuesfasterthaninexperiencedengineers.

Thetacitcharacteroftheknowledgenegativelyaffectsthetransferofit.Severalengineersstatedthatitis difficult to explain knowledge to others and they do not know how to improve this. During abrainstorm sessionwith one shift team it is also confirmed that they did not see the added value oftransferring this knowledge to the other teams, because troubleshooting skills are personal andeveryoneneedstodeveloptheirownwayofworking.

4.1.1.2KnowledgecomplexityKnowledge complexity refers to the number of closely interactingcomponents of knowledge. To solve a DN, thorough analysis of theissue is required to understand where the problem is located.However,theproblemisthattherearealotofpossibilitieswheretheproblemcanbelocatedinthecomplexlithographysystemandthereis a lot of background information on for example the software or hardware needed to solve it. This

“The knowledge is in myhead and it is difficult toexplain to others” -Interviewee7

“It can be hardware, software,human errors… There are a lotof possibilities where theproblem can be located.” -Interviewee2

33

backgroundinformationisavailableindatabases,butitisunstructuredandthereisalotofinformation.On topof that, theengineersneed toknowhowthe lithography systemworks inorder toperformagood analysis, but, as stated, the lithography system is very complex and based on cutting edgetechnology. It consists of many different components and parts, and newmachine technologies areintroduced each year. The information is available, however it is unstructured and this is the mainproblem.Theengineershaveto figureout themselveswhich information theyneedandsearch for it.Thecomplexityofknowledgenegativelyaffectsknowledgetransfer.

4.1.2NetworkcharacteristicsThe second type of characteristics to influence knowledge transfer are the network characteristics.Thesecharacteristicsaredividedintofourfactors:(1)networkstructure,(2)sharedvision,(3)socialtiestrengthand(4)trust.Eachfactorisdiscussedthoroughlyinthenextparagraphs.

4.1.2.1NetworkstructureThenumberofconnectionsandthepatternofanetworkdeterminethenetworkstructure.InFigure11thenetworkpatternofTT5ispresented.EachdotrepresentsaTT5engineerandthetrianglewithblacklinesindicatestheshiftteam.EachTT5engineerhasconnectionswithtwoTT5engineersfromtheirshiftteam and four TT5 engineers from their competence. During their shift they have contact with theengineersfromtheirshiftteamandatthebeginningandtheendoftheshifttheyhavecontactwiththeengineers from their competence. Thus, each engineer has connections with six out of the fourteenengineers. The engineers hardly ever have contactwith the engineers fromdifferent competences indifferentshiftteams.

Figure11:NetworkpatternwithinTT5

BesidestheTT5theengineershavecontactwithfifteentotwentyTestoperators(OPTE)oftheirownshiftteamandwiththeVISengineersofthesamecompetenceswhoaredividedoverfourshiftteams.Officiallythe shift teams of TT5 are part of the OPTE shift teams, but the TT5engineersonlyworkinthesameroomasOPTEduringtheirnightshift.During theirmorning and evening shift the TT5 engineerswork in theVISroom.VISworksinadifferentschedulethanTT5andthereforeTT5

TT5engineer

Connection

Shiftteam1

Shiftteam2

Shiftteam3Shiftteam4

Shiftteam5

“It is conflicting you gotanother teamwithin a team.But being one person, yourteam is the other shift. It ismaybe better ifwe look at itas one team.” - Interviewee6

34

hascontactwithalotofdifferentVISengineers.

Hence,TT5hasalotofconnectionsandispartofmultipledifferentteams:TT5itself,twotothreeVIScompetences divided into four teams, and the shift team of TT5 & OPTE. The high number ofconnections with other departments provides the TT5 engineers withmany opportunities to benefitfrom the experience of others and facilitates knowledge transfer with the teams outside of TT5department.

However, the structure of TT5 complicates knowledge transfer within the team of TT5 itself andtherefore it can be stated that the structure negatively affects knowledge transfer between the shiftteams. The TT5 engineers confirm that they exchange a lot of knowledgewith their own shift teambecausetheysittogetherforeighthours,butverylimitedtotheothershiftteamssincetheyonlymeetattheshifttransfers.OntopofthatTT5doesnotfeelasateamtotheengineers,sothismeansthatthenetworkstructureinfluencestheteamfeelingofTT5.

4.1.2.2SharedvisionThesharedvisionconsistsoftwoimportanttopics:asharedgoalandthewayofworking.Firstthesharedgoalisaddressed.ThereasonTT5is foundedand thus the teamgoalofTT5 isgiven inoneof the firstpresentationsoftheTT5project.Thisgoalis:“Toincreasethesolvingpower and solving speed at the system 24/7 on hard down DN’s”.Solvingpowerrefers totheamountofdisturbances (DN’s)solvedbyTT5comparedtotherestofthedepartmentandsolvingspeedreferstotheaveragetimeittakestosolveaDN.Oneengineermentionedthattheteamdoeshaveagoal,buttheyhavenevergottenachancetositdownandtalkaboutit,andtheydonothaveasharedapproachtoreachthatgoal.

Secondly,therearedifferentwaysofworking.ThecompetencesatVIShavedifferentwaysofworking,andalso the shift teamshavedifferentwaysofworking. Forexample, every teamdeveloped itsownmethodtotrainOPTEintheirshiftteam.Thereisnostructureandtherearenoagreements,confirmedbybothengineersandmanagement.Ontopofthat,oneengineermentionedthatthroughoutthefirstyearofTT5thewayofworkingofTT5changedmanytimes.

The lackofanapproachfortheteamgoalandthedifferentwaysofworkingofthecompetencesandshiftteamshaveanegativeeffectonknowledgetransferbetweentheshiftteams.Italsocausesalotofconfusion;oneengineermentionedthattheway-of-workingchangedveryoftenandtheengineersdidnotknowanymorewhatthecurrentway-of-workingwas.TheTT5engineersconfirmthattheytransferalotofknowledgetotheirownshiftteam,howeverbecauseofthelackingsharedvisionovertheshiftteams,thisknowledgeisnottransferredfromoneshiftteamtotheother.

4.1.2.3TiestrengthThe tie strength refers to thequalityof the relationshipbetween theengineers.Tie strength typicallyimproveswiththefrequencyofseeingeachother.Itisconfirmedbytheengineersthattherelationshipwiththeirshiftteammembersisverygood;theyexplainthatthisisbecausetheysitandworktogether

“Every time during the TT5meetings I hear a new way ofworking. It is changing a lot.Alsoeverycompetencehastheirown way of working” -Interviewee2

35

and see each other every day. All engineers exchange knowledge withtheir shiftmembers on a regular basis. This is because they know eachotherpersonallyandknowwhattheyareinterestedin.

Due to the shift schedule theywork in, the shift teams have four timesshifttransferperten-daycyclewiththeteambeforeandafterthemintheschedule, and two times shift transfer per ten-day cycle with the othertwo teams. This is illustrated in Table 9. For example: in a ten day shiftcycle,shift team1has fourtimesshift transferwithteam5andteam2,andtwotimesshifttransferwithteam3andteam4.

Table9:Numberofshifttransfersbetweentheoutgoingandincomingshiftteamsinaten-dayworkcycle

Outgoingshift

Incomingshift Team1 Team2 Team3 Team4 Team5Team1 x - 2 - 4Team2 4 x - 2 -Team3 - 4 x - 2Team4 2 - 4 x -Team5 - 2 - 4 x

More thanhalfof theengineersmentions that thebondwith theshift teams theyseemoreoften, isbetter than with the other two shift teams; they personally get to know each other. There is oneengineerwhodoesnotnoticeadifferencebetweentheteams.ThetiestrengthbetweentheteamsofTT5thatonlyseeeachothertwicepercycleisdescribedasweak.Theyhardlyseeeachotherandontopof that, these two transfers are the night-morning shift transfers. These shift transfers are usuallyshorterthantheothersandtheengineerscomingfromthenightshiftareusuallyverytiredandwanttogohomeassoonaspossible.Thereforetheseteamshaveevenlesstimetobuildarelationship.Outsideof the shift transfers TT5 could have had other opportunities, such as team meetings, to build arelationshipwith theother shifts.However therehaveonlybeen two teammeetings so far since theteamwas founded one-and-a-half year ago. It is due to this research that these two teammeetingsoccurredwithallfifteenTT5engineerspresent.

The last factor that causes weak ties amongst engineers is the stability of the team. Due to areorganization,one thirdof the teamchanged jobsand this indicates that relationshipsneeded toberebuildagain.Theoverviewof the tie strengthamongst theengineers isdepicted inFigure12on thenextpage.The tiestrength is illustratedby the thicknessof the lineandthenodes represent theTT5engineersinateam.

The tie strength influences knowledge transfer in two ways. First of all, the engineers confirm thatknowledgetransferispositivelyaffectedwhenthetiestrengthisstrong.Secondly,knowledgetransferisaffectednegativelywhenthetiestrengthisweak.

“The transfers with the teambeforeand afterme are good,because you personally knowthem.Thereisadifferencewiththe other teams because yousee them a lot less. Our shiftteam is very close and thathelps a lot with knowledgetransfer”.-Interviewee8

36

Figure12:TiestrengthbetweenengineersofthefiveTT5shiftteams

4.1.2.4TrustTrust refers to the degree to which the source or receiver ofknowledge is perceived as reliable. Trust develops over timeand is therefore closely related to tie strength. Not everyengineer mentioned trust as a factor to influence knowledgetransfer; four engineers however confirmed that trust is anissue at themoment. One engineer evenmentioned negativecompetitionbetweentheshiftteams.Everyshiftteamperceivestheirteamasthebestteamandtheyare trying to be better than the rest. Sometimes it occurs that engineers are withheld to transferknowledgebecausetheyarenotsurewhethertheircolleagueswouldunderstanditanduseittherightway.

Nonetheless,alsoateamleaderconfirmedthattheremightbesometrustissuesbetweenthedifferentshiftteamsandthisisalsomentionedintheproblemstatement:“peopleredotheworkofthepreviousshifts;everyonewants tosee itwith theirowneyes”.This indicatesa lackof trust in theabilitiesandskillsof theirpredecessors.Ontopofthat,duringoneofthebrainstormsessionswithashift teamofTT5,thethreeengineersstatedthefollowing:“Themainproblemisthatpeopledon’ttrusteachother.”

Theresultofthelackoftrustisthatsomeengineersmightbewithheldfromtransferringknowledgeorfromacceptingknowledgefromcolleaguestheydonottrust.Whensomeonedoesnotunderstandthetransferred knowledge correctly, it could have serious consequences or damage (a part of) thelithographysystem.

4.1.3PersonalcharacteristicsThe third type of characteristics that are researched are the personal characteristics. The personalcharacteristics are divided into themotivation, disseminative capacity, and absorptive capacity of anindividual.Thesefactorsandfindingsarediscussedinthenextparagraphs.

TT5engineer

Strongtiestrength

Averagetiestrength

Weak tiestrength

Shiftteam1

Shiftteam2

Shiftteam3Shiftteam4

Shiftteam5

“Tome itmakessensethatifyouseepeoplelessoften,thereislesstrust.Itis a bottleneck in the process. If youdon’ttrustsomeonetointerpretittheright way, it could have seriousconsequences.”-Interviewee3

37

4.1.3.1MotivationtotransferknowledgeThe motivation refers to the willingness of an individual to transferknowledge.Overall,theTT5engineersarehighlymotivatedtotransferorexchange knowledge with their own shift team, OPTE and VIS. Mostengineersmakeaneffort transferringknowledge to theother shiftsandare motivated to improve. A few engineers stated that they will onlytransfer if the other person is interested in knowing it. One engineerlinkedthistotherelationshipwiththeengineer.

However,theengineersadmitthatafterashifttheysometimesjustwanttogohome.Afteranightshiftthisfeeling isevenstronger,becausetheyaretiredandtheirweekendstarts.Thus,whentheengineersaremotivatedthispositivelyaffectsknowledgetransfer,butwhentheengineersarenotmotivated,thishasanegativeeffectonknowledgetransfer.

4.1.3.2DisseminativecapacityThedisseminativecapacityreferstothecapacityofanindividualtotranslate the knowledge into a language that the recipient canunderstand.Thedisseminative capacitydiffersperengineer. Someengineers indicated that they did not have any trouble withtransferring knowledge and explaining things, but other engineersstatedthattheyface issueswith itandthatthisresults inthemnotsharinganythingatallordoing itunstructured or chaotic. Two engineers mentioned that doing their administration prior to the shifttransfer helps themwithmaking the transfer clear and short.When an engineer lacks disseminativecapacity,thisnegativelyaffectsknowledgetransfer.

4.1.3.3AbsorptivecapacityThe absorptive capacity refers to the ability of recipients of knowledge toassimilateandapply it. Theabsorptive capacity alsodiffersperperson. Twoengineers mention that they find it easier to absorb and understandinformation when it is explained face-to-face rather than reading it from adocument. Also a team leader underpinned that: “There are differencesbetweenthepeople,noteveryoneiscapabletolookataDNandunderstandit.Somepeoplelikethatandothersdonot.”Duringface-to-faceordirectknowledgetransfer,feedbackcanbegivenandquestionscanbeaskedeasierthanwithindirecttransfer.Itisalsovisiblewhetherthereceiverunderstandsit.Someengineersalsohaveseenthatothersdidnotprocessorunderstandwhatwas explained and one engineer states that this has to do with experience or prior knowledge.Thereforeitcanbeconcludedthattheabsorptivecapacityaffectsthesuccessofthetransfer.

4.1.4OtherknowledgetransferissuesNexttothefactorsthatresultedfromChapter2:TheoreticalFramework,other factorswerefoundtoinfluence knowledge transfer. Three other factors were found and these are the following: (1)knowledge transfermechanisms, (2) knowingwhat others know, and (3) knowledge transfer process.Thesethreefactorsarediscussedinmoredetailinthenextparagraphs.

“Ionlyseepeopleaftermyortheir night shift and if I amreadywith DN transfer after10minutes,Igohome.Theseshift transfers are reallyshort.Nobody enjoys stayingforanothertwentyminutes.”-Interviewee4

“I try to transfer as much aspossible,although it issometimesdifficult to explain knowledge.” -Interviewee1

“It is easier to absorbthe information face toface than from readingan e-mail.” -Interviewee1

38

4.1.4.1KnowledgetransfermechanismsTheknowledgetransfermechanismsarethemechanismsthatareused to transfer knowledge. This factor is found to also affectknowledge transfer between the shift teams. Currently, mostknowledge transfer is done during the shift transfer and anoccasionalemailissendaround.Mostengineersprefertotransferknowledge face-to-face, because there is a possibility to providefeedback and ask questions. By sending an email it is unsurewhether the receivers read the email andunderstand everythingand when there are questions or feedback, it takes a long timebeforetheseareanswered.Ontopof that, theengineersreceivemany e-mails per day, so sometimes emails are overlooked or they disappear in their inbox. Aftersolvinganissue,thesolutionissharedindatabasessuchastheVISdatabase.However,therearealsoissues with the use of that mechanism. By putting information or knowledge into a database, theknowledgeremainsanonymousandnofeedbackcanbegiven.

Sinceitisconfirmedthatmostknowledgetransferoccursduringtheshifttransfer,thereareverylimitedopportunities to transferknowledgebetweentheshift teams,especiallybetweentheteamsthatonlysee each other twice in a ten days work cycle. Therefore it can be concluded that the choice ofknowledgetransfermechanismaffectsthesuccessofthetransfer.

4.1.4.2KnowingwhatothersknowThe second factor is referred to as “knowing what others know”.Four engineers mentioned that they are unaware of what theircolleaguesknowandhadnooverviewofthat. It ismentionedthatbeing unaware of other’s knowledge withholds engineers fromtransferring,becausetheotherTT5engineersmightalreadyknow.They do not want to bother each other with a lot of emails orquestionsandthereforelessknowledgeistransferred.

4.1.4.3KnowledgetransferprocessThethirdfoundfactoristhelackofaknowledgetransferprocess.CurrentlytherearenoagreementsandthereisnoprocessforknowledgetransferinTT5.Everythingisbasedonownrequestandeverybodydoesitdifferently.Allengineersconfirmthattherearenoagreementsmadeorthattheyareunaware of the agreements, except for the handover of open, henceunresolvedDN’sduringtheshifttransfertotheincomingshift.Thelackofaknowledgetransferprocessnegativelyaffectsknowledgetransfer.

4.1.5EmpiricalmodelandevaluationInFigure13thefinalempiricalmodelisdepicted.Asdiscussedinthischapter,empiricalevidenceforallpredefinedfactors is found.Ontopof that, threeadditional factorsare foundto influenceknowledgetransfer between shift teams: the mechanisms, knowing what others know, and a process for

“TherearenoagreementsI believe. It is based onyourownrequest.Thereisalsonoprocesstotransfernewissuestoeachother.”-Interviewee1

“It is easier to explain face to face,verbally. Writing an email leavesspace for interpretation and can beambiguous. If you ask questions inanemailyoucanexpectareply inafew days.With verbal transfers youcan ask directly, explain everything,andaskfordetails.Emailsdisappearsomewhere;yougetsomanyemailsonadailybasis.”Interviewee1

“Sometimes you hear somethingand then you are surprised thatthey know that. But maybeeverybody already knows it, butthey just don’t tell you.” -Interviewee3

39

knowledgetransfer.Allfactorsaffectknowledgetransfer,whichisdepictedastheeffectofexperienceAonperformanceB.

Figure13:Finalempiricalmodel

Theresultsarediscussedwiththemanagerandateamleaderofthetestdepartmentandconfirmedbythem.Thebiggestissuesatthemomentiscausedbythefollowingfactors:tacitness,sharedvision,tiestrength,trust,motivation,knowledgetransfermechanisms,knowingwhatothersknowandaprocessfor knowledge transfer. Together with the manager of the test department and a team leader, thedecision is made to put the main focus of the solution design on developing agreements with theengineers onwhat knowledge they should transfer and how they should transfer that knowledge toeachother,takingtheothermainfactorsintoaccount.

4.1.6DesignparameterslinkedtothedriversandbarriersThe design parameters, as stated in paragraph 2.4, are adjusted according to the results of thediagnosis.TheadjustmentsandnewdesignparametersareillustratedinboldlettersinTable10.Threenewdesignparametersaredeveloped:knowledgetobetransferred,overviewofwhoknowswhatandefforttotransferknowledge.Theseparametersarealsoaspectsthatcanbeinfluencedandthesecameforwardduringthe interviewswiththeengineers.Thefirstadditionaldesignparameter,knowledgetobetransferred,involvesfourdifferentdriversandbarriers:thetacitnessandcomplexityofknowledge,disseminativecapacityandtheknowledgetransfermechanisms.

Thesecondadditionaldesignparameter is theoverviewofwhoknowswhat.Thisparameterreferstothedegreetowhichanoverviewofwhoknowswhat isprovided.Thisparameter involvestwodriversandbarriers,namely:mechanismsandknowingwhatothersknow.

ExperienceteamA

ExperienceteamB

PerformanceteamB

PerformanceteamA

4

3

2

1

- Knowledgecharacteristics:- Tacitness- Complexity

- Networkcharacteristics:- Networkstructure- Sharedvision- Tiestrength- Trust

- Personalcharacteristics- Motivation- Disseminative capacity- Absorptive capacity

- Knowledge transfermechanisms- Knowingwhatothersknow- Processforknowledge transfer

Knowledge transfer:2&3Knowledge creation:1&4

40

The third additional design parameter is the required effort to transfer knowledge to the other shiftteams. This design parameter involves the factors: motivation, mechanisms and knowledge transferprocess.

Ontopofthethreeadditionalparameters,fourinvolvedfactorsareaddedtotheexistingparameters.Tiestrengthandtrustareaddedtotheinteractionmechanism,becausetheengineersconfirmedthatitiseasiertobuildarelationshipandtogettoknoweachotherwhentalkingface-to-face,ratherthanonlycommunicatingviae-mail.Thefactor ‘knowledgetransferprocess isaddedtotheparameter“uniformwayofworking”,sinceitconcernsagreementsforauniformwayofworkingfortheengineers.Thefinalfactorthatisaddedismotivationfortheparameternetworkstability.Someengineersstatedthattheyaremoremotivatedtotransferknowledgeandtohelpwhennewengineersarehiredintheirteam.

Table10:Designparameterslinkedtothedriversandbarriersfoundinthediagnosis

Involveddriversandbarriers Designparameter

Explanation Parameterrange

Tacitness,disseminativecapacity,absorptivecapacity,tiestrength,trust

Interaction–Mechanism

Typeofmechanismusedtointeract

Examples:document,database,meeting,shifttransfer

Trust,tiestrength,networkstructure,sharedvision

Interaction–Frequency

Thefrequencyatwhichpeopleinteractwitheachother

Low–High

Tiestrength,trust,motivation Interaction–Formality

Degreetowhichtheinteractionisformal

Informal–Formal

Tacitness,complexity,sharedvision,tiestrength,trust

Interaction–Time

Availabletimetointeract xminutes

Sharedvision,motivation Goal–Level

Levelofgoalsthataresetup

Individual–Team

Sharedvision,knowledgetransferprocess

Goal–Uniformwayofworking

Agreementsonauniformwayofworking

Unclear–clear

Networkstructure,tiestrength,trust,motivation

Network–Stability

Thefrequencyatwhichemployeesleaveandarehired

Low–High

Networkstructure,trust,tiestrength

Network–Size

Thesizeofanetwork Small–Big

Tacitness,complexity,disseminativecapacity,mechanisms

Knowledge Theknowledgetobetransferred

-

Mechanisms,knowingwhatothersknow

Overviewofwhoknowswhat

Thedegreetowhichanoverviewofwhoknowswhatisprovided

Low–high

Motivation,mechanisms,knowledgetransferprocess

Efforttotransferknowledge

Therequiredeffortfortheengineerstotransferknowledgetoothershiftteams

Low–high

41

4.2ResultssolutiondesignAs themost important conclusion from thediagnosis is the fact that there isnoprocess, the startofimprovingknowledgetransferissettingupaprocess.Theothermainissues,namely:tacitness,sharedvision,tiestrength,trust,motivation,knowledgetransfermechanisms,andknowingwhatothersknow,are taken into account when setting up the process. This paragraph starts with a description of thedesign specifications in paragraph 4.2.1. The next paragraph, 4.2.2, provides the results of thebrainstorm,whichfocusedonwhatknowledgeis importantfortheengineerstotransferandhowthiscanbe transferredbest.Paragraph4.2.3describes the threeconcept solutions thataredeveloped. Inthenextparagraph,4.2.4,thethreeconceptsolutionsareevaluatedandoneconceptsolutionischosenfor further elaboration. The final paragraph, 4.2.5, gives a detailed description of the final solutiondesign,theuseddesignparametersandthefinalimpactofthesolutiondesign.

4.2.1DesignspecificationsVanAken et al. (2007) define four categories of specifications. Functional requirements focus on theperformanceofthedesign.Userrequirementsaretherequirementsfromtheperspectiveoftheuser.Boundary conditions are constraints to the solution that must be met unconditionally. Designrestrictionsareconstraintstothepreferredsolutionspace.TherequirementsarebasedontheresultsfromtheinterviewswiththeTT5engineersandtheteamleaders.Thespecificationsarethefollowing:

Functionalrequirements:- Thedesignshoulddiminishthesystemdown-timeduetoknowledgetransferissues;- Thedesignshouldimproveandfacilitateknowledgetransferbetweenshiftteams;- Thedesignshouldtrytomakeuseoftheavailableandknowntransfermechanisms;

Userrequirements:

- Theengineersshouldbemotivatedtousethedesign;- Thedesignshouldnotrequiretoomucheffort;- Thedesignshouldmakeclearwhatneedstobetransferredandhow;

Boundaryconditions:

- Thedesignshouldbecost-neutralorcost-saving,i.e.theincreaseinthesolvingperformanceoftheengineersshouldmakeupforthedown-timeofthelithographysystemsduetoknowledgetransfer;

- Thedesignshouldnotaffecttheteamandcompetenceconstructions;Designrestrictions:

- Thedesignshouldbesupportedbyboththeteamleadersandtheengineers;- Thedesignshouldbeapplicabletoallcompetences.

42

4.2.2ResultsbrainstormAs elaborated in paragraph 3.2.2 a brainstorm is organized to first understand what is important totransfer and needed to improve their troubleshoot skills. For the participants of the brainstorm thefollowingtopicsarekeytotransfer:

- AllnewDN’s,becausethesecannotbefoundinthedatabasesyet- Tools&Skills- Structuralissues- Everythingthathappensbeforediscoveringwhattheproblemis:troubleshootingandanalyzing- The‘why’behindsolvinganissue–whydidanengineerperformcertaintasks- Troubleshooting skills: thinking pattern, approach of analyzing, finding outwhat the problem

was

The second part of the brainstorm focused on determining how this should be transferred. Theparticipantscameupwiththefollowingthreeideas:

• Createanewdatabasewithall thenew issuesandnewhardware/software/tooling,providinganoverviewofwhodidwhatinTT5.Ontopofthatorganizingcompetencemeetingstodiscusscomplexissuesortopics.

• RequestsystemforsolvedDN’s.OnceaDNisclosedbyTT5,theengineerwillaskhiscolleagueswhethertheywantmoreinformationontheissue.Whenthereisonlyoneengineerthatwantsthe information, theywilldiscuss itduringashift transfer.Whentherearemultipleengineersrequiring more information, the engineer that closed the issue will create a PowerPointpresentationontheissue,howitwassolvedandthethinkingpatternusedtosolvetheissue.

• CreatePowerPointpresentationsaboutsolvedcomplexDN’sandkeeptherestasitis.

4.2.3ConceptsolutionsThree concept solutions are developed based on the design specifications, design parameters andresultsofthebrainstorm.Thefollowingthreeconceptsolutionsaredeveloped:

The first concept solution is to transfer knowledge that the engineers think is important via shifttransfer,PowerPointpresentationsande-mail.Thismeansthatthesituationiskeptalmostthesameasitisatthismoment.Asstatedbefore,thereareseveralengineerswhodonotwanttochangethewaythey transfer knowledge right now.During the interviews several engineers stated that theywant todeterminethemselveswhattheyaregoingtotransferandhowtheyaregoingtotransferthis.Thethirdgroupinthebrainstormsessionsonhowtheyshouldtransfertheknowledge(paragraph4.2.2),cameupwith the idea to make PowerPoint presentations about solved complex DN’s, but to further keepknowledgetransferthesamewayas it isrightnow.Themanagerofthetestdepartmentbelieves it isimportant that the engineers are willing and motivated to work with the solution design and theybelievethatitisonlygoingtoworkinthefutureifeveryoneagreeswiththechange.

The second concept solution is to transfer the approach and solution of the new DN’s and theknowledgeneededtotroubleshoot,suchastools,tipsandtricks,andhardwareknowledge.Thetransfermechanismsmustbeadjustedtothetypeofknowledgebeingtransferredinordertomakeknowledge

43

transfer effective (Gupta & Govindaranjan, 2000). Therefore a tool, shift transfer and meetings arechosen as transfer mechanisms. The tool that is used to transfer is OneNote, which is a Microsoftprogramthat isused for informationgatheringandmulti-usercollaboration.OneNote isa tool that isknown by every engineer and easy to use. On top of the OneNote file, the shift transfer is used totransfertheopenDN’stothenextshift.Lastbutnotleast,meetingswitheveryonefromTT5aretobeorganized,discussinginterestingtopicsorcomplexDN’s.Afterthemeetingsitisadvisedtohaveateambuilding activity. The OneNote is used to transfer explicit knowledge, while the shift transfers andmeetingsfocusontransferringtacitknowledge,sincetacitknowledgeisdeeplyrootedinroutinesandactions(Nonaka,1994).

The third concept solution requires the engineers to transfer everything, so both the new and theknownDN’s.BytransferringallDN’s,agoodoverviewfortheengineersiscreatedofwhoknowswhat.Withthisconceptsolutiontheengineersdonothavetothinkaboutwhattheyhavetotransfertotheircolleagues,sincetheyhavetotransfereverything.Thisknowledgewillbetransferredinthesamewayasthesecondconceptsolution:viatheshifttransfer,knowledgesharingmeetingsandOneNote.

ThedesignparametersofthecurrentsituationandthethreeconceptsolutionsarecomparedinTable11.

Table11:Designparametercomparisonofthecurrentsituation,conceptsolution1,2and3

Designparameter Currentsituation Conceptsolution1 Conceptsolution2 Conceptsolution3Interaction–Mechanism

Shifttransferandoccasionallye-mail

Shifttransfer,PowerPointande-mail

Shifttransfer,knowledgesharingmeetingsandOneNote

Shifttransfer,knowledgesharingmeetingsandOneNote

Interaction–Frequency

Shifttransfer:twicepershift(beginningandendofeachshift)

Shifttransfer:twicepershift(beginningandendofeachshift)

Shifttransfer:twicepershift(beginningandendofeachshift)Meetings:atleastfourtimesperyear

Shifttransfer:twicepershift(beginningandendofeachshift)Meetings:atleastfourtimesperyear

Interaction–Formality

Formal Formal Formalandinformal Formal

Interaction–Time

Shifttransfer:5-30minutes,dependingonthetopics

Shifttransfer:5-30minutes,dependingonthetopics

Shifttransfer:30minutesMeetings:2hoursTT5,2hourscompetence

Shifttransfer:30minutesMeetings:2hoursTT5,2hourscompetence

Goal–Uniformwayofworking

Unclear Neutral Clear Veryclear

Knowledgetobetransferred

Undetermined Everythingthatisimportantaccordingtotheengineer

NewknowledgeonDN’s,tools,hardware,software,tipsandtricks

AllknowledgeonDN’s,tools,hardware,software,tipsandtricks

Overviewofwhoknowswhat

Low Low High Veryhigh

Efforttotransferknowledge

Low Low Medium High

44

4.2.4ConceptsolutionevaluationandselectionTo evaluate the proposed solutions, evaluation criteria are set up. These criteria are based on thestatementsoftheteamleadersduringtheinterviews,themostimportantrequirementsforthesolutiondesign, and statements of the TT5 engineers during the brainstorm sessions. The evaluation is doneduringasecondmeetingwiththeTT5engineers,whoaretheexpertsandaregoingtoworkwiththenewsolutiondesign.Percriteriaitisdiscussedwhichconceptsolutionsuitsbest.Thisproposalreceives3points,thesecondbestconceptsolutionreceives2pointsandtheleastfitproposalreceives1point.Theproposalwiththehighesttotalscoreisevaluatedasbestfitproposal.Table12presentstheresultsfromtheevaluation.Thecriteriaarediscussedinthenextsections.

Table12:Proposalsolutionevaluationandselection

Concept1 Concept2 Concept3

BestfortheperformanceofASML 1 2 3

Supportedbybothmanagementandengineers 2 3 2

Applicabilitytoallcompetences 3 3 3

Clearprocessforknowledgetransfer 1 3 3

Ratiowork/knowledgetransfer 3 2 1

Effortfortheengineers 3 2 1

Total: 13 15 13

Ashortdescriptionofeachcriterion isgiven.Thefirstcriterion is ‘best fortheperformanceofASML’.Themanager and team leadersof the testdepartmentbelieve that is notonly important to listen towhattheengineerswant,butalsotolookatwhatisbestfortheperformanceofASML.Conceptsolution3 isbest for theperformance,becausetheengineerswill transfermoreknowledgetoeachotherandwill be up-to-date with everything that has happened in other shifts, which will benefit theirperformance.

Thesecondcriterionis‘supportedbybothmanagementandengineers’.Thisreferstothesupportandthe acceptance of the design by both management and the engineers. When the engineers do notacceptasolutiondesign, it isnotsustainablesincetheyarenotgoingtouseit.However,notonlytheopinionof theengineers is at stake,butalso theopinionofmanagementandof the futureofASML.Togetherwiththeengineersconceptsolution2 ischosenasbestoptionconcerningthesustainability,becausemostengineerssupportthesolutionandtheythinkthatifnothingisgoingtochangeforthemrightnow,thischangewillcomeinafewyears.

The third criterion is ‘applicability to all competences’. The manager and team leaders of the testdepartmentarealreadystrivingforonesimilarwayofworkingacrossalldifferentcompetences,sincethere currently aremanydifferencesanddifficulties.According to theengineersall concept solutionsareapplicabletothedifferentcompetencesandthereforereceivethreepoints.

45

Thefourthcriterionis‘clearprocessforknowledgetransfer’.Sinceoneofthebiggestissuesaccordingtomanagementisthelackofaclearprocess,thiscriterionisselectedfortheevaluation.Conceptsolution2and3bothprovideaclearprocessforknowledgetransfer.

The fifth criterion is ‘ratiowork/transfer’. Theengineers andmanagementwant to keepa good ratiobetweenworkingonissuesandtransferringknowledgeanddonotwanttheengineerstolosefocusoftheirmaintask:solvingissues.Therefore,thiscriterionisselected.Conceptsolution1providesthebestratio, since the engineers can determine themselveswhen they transfer to their colleagues and howoften.

Thesixthandlastcriterionis‘effortfortheengineers’.Thesolutiondesignshouldbeeasytoworkwithand should not cost a lot of effort. Concept solution 1 is chosen as best option for this, since everyengineercandecidewhatheorshewantstotransferandtherearenorulestheyshouldfollowonwhatorhowtotransferknowledge.

As stated in Table 12, concept solution 2 is the best proposal based on the criteria. Therefore thisproposalisselectedtogetherwiththeengineersandtheconceptiselaboratedduringdetailingsessionswitheachshiftteam.Thefinalsolutiondesignisdiscussedinthenextparagraph.

4.2.5FinalsolutiondesignAs explained in the previous paragraph, the second concept solution is chosen for the final solutiondesign.Aftertheevaluationandselection,meetingsareorganizedwitheachshiftteamtoelaboratetheconceptsolutionintoafinalsolutiondesign.ThefinalsolutiondesignconcernsagreementsonwhatTT5needs to transfer to each other and how they should do that. The engineers will transfer all newknowledgetoothershiftsusingthreemechanisms:knowledgesharingmeetings,shifttransfer,andanonlineknowledge-sharingtool.InFigure14thefinalsolutiondesignisdepicted.

Figure14:Finalsolutiondesign

Knowledge:allnewknowledgeDuringthebrainstormsessionwithTT5theengineersstatedthattheywouldfinditusefultotransferall‘newknowledge’ toeachother. This is importantbecause this knowledgeand information cannotbefoundanywhereandtheyusuallyhearaboutthisviaVIS,butthere isnosystemfor it.Firstofall, theengineersshouldtransferknowledgeaboutnewDN’stoeachother,sincethesesolutionsarenotadded

Knowledgetransfer

Allnew knowledgeonDN’s,tools,

software,hardware

Knowledgesharingmeetings

Shifttransfer Onlineknowledgesharingtool

46

to anydatabase yet.On topof that it is important for the engineers to transfer knowledgeon tools,hardware,software,andtipsandtricks.

OnlineknowledgesharingtoolThetool that isusedtotransferknowledge isOneNote,which isaMicrosoftprogramthat isusedforinformationgatheringandmulti-usercollaboration.OneNoteisatoolthatisknownbyeveryengineerandeasytouse.TheOneNotefile isusedasanoverarchingfileforthedifferentshiftsthatgathersallthe knowledge of the TT5 engineers. The first benefit of OneNote compared to other tools is that itregisterswhichuseradjustedoraddedwhattothefile.Forexample,ifengineer1addedinformationonanewtooltothefile,hisinitialswillbeaddedtohistext.Inthatway,hiscolleagueswillknowwhomtoaskquestionsiftheywanttoknowmore.

Thenextbenefit isthatOneNotekeepstrackofwhichinformationisrecentlyaddedtothefile.Whentheengineerscomebackfromtheirfour-dayweekend,theywillopentheOneNotefileandeverythingthathasbeenadjustedoradded inthosefourdayswillbe inbold letters inthefileandwithacursortheycaneasilygothroughtherecentlyaddeditems.TheOneNotefilewillprovideagoodoverviewoftheavailableknowledgewithinTT5andwillalsobeusefulwhenanewengineer ishired in theteam,sinceallknowledgeandinformationisgatheredinoneplaceinsteadofvariousdifferentteamsitesanddatabases.TheOneNotefilewillbedividedintodifferentsubjects,suchasDN’s,tooling,andsoftware.AmoredetaileddescriptionofthesubjectsoftheOneNotefileisstatedinAppendixE.

ShifttransferThe shift transfer is similar to theway ofworking right now, but there are no agreementsmade, soagreementsaresetup.Firstofall,theshifttransfershouldbestartedwiththeopennewDN’sthatneedtobe transferred to thenext shift and still require certain actions.When transferringopenDN’s, theengineersneedtostartwiththehistoryoftheDN,thusadescriptionofwhathasbeendonealready,and the thinking pattern and methodology behind these steps. It is very important to transfer the“know-why”,suchthattheincomingshiftunderstandswhyactionsareexecutedandwhichdirectiontogonext.Thenextstepsandpossiblycreatedactionplanneedtobediscussedasthelaststep.Secondly,theopenknownDN’sshouldbe transferredanddiscussedbriefly.Thirdly,additional informationoradiscussionbasedontheDNrequestsystemisprovided.Fourthly,othertopicsbasedontheOneNotefilecan be discussed. For example, additional information on tooling, or specific tips and tricks can bediscussedduringtheshifttransfer.Finally,anyotherbusinessisdiscussed.Thiscouldbeaboutprojectstheengineersworkon,orotherbusinessrelatedtopics.

KnowledgesharingmeetingsThe third mechanism for the engineers to transfer knowledge to each other is a knowledge-sharingmeetingwitheveryonepresent,henceall fifteenengineers. It isproposedtoorganize thesemeetingsfourtimesperyearasaminimum,dependingontheavailabilityoftopics.Itisdecidednottoorganizethemmore often, due to the conflicting shift schedule and increase in system downtime due to theabsenceofTT5’sdirectsupportfortheTestdepartment.ThemeetingwilltakefourhoursandeveryTT5engineerisexpectedtojoin.ThemeetingsareorganizedandledbytheteamleadersandthemanageroftheTestdepartment.

47

Themeetingissplitintotwodifferentparts.ThefirsttwohoursofthemeetingareheldwiththeentireTT5team,andtheremainingtwohourspercompetenceteams.ThegeneralTT5meetingwillfocusongeneral TT5 topics or ongoing projects, while the competence part focuses on competence specifictopicsthatarerequestedbytheengineers.Alsobestpracticescanbesharedandmorecomplexortacitknowledge can be discussed. After the meeting a team building activity such as a meal or drinks isproposed,toincreasethesocialtiestrengthbetweentheTT5engineersandtogettoknoweachotherbetterinaninformalway.AproposalforthefirstTT5meetingisprovidedinappendixF.

ImpactofthefinalsolutionThefinalsolutiondesignimpactsandimprovesthecurrentsituationinvariousways.Firstofall,thefinalsolutiondesignwill increasetheamountandfrequencyofinteractionbetweentheengineers.Thiswillleadtoimprovedmotivation,tiestrengthandtrustamongtheengineersbecausetheygettoknoweachotherbetterinaformalandinformalway.Ontopofthat,thetransferoftacitandcomplexknowledgeisfacilitated because there is more time available to transfer this. This will finally lead to improvedknowledgetransferandanincreasedperformance.

Secondly, thefinalsolutiondesignprovidestheengineerswithabetteroverviewofwhoknowswhat.Thiswill leadto lessreinventionofthewheelandengineersredoingtheworkofpreviousshifts,sinceeverythingisbetterregistered.Itwillalsoimproveknowledgetransferbetweentheshiftsandincreasetheperformanceoftheengineers.

Finally,withthesolutiondesignauniformwayofworkingfortheengineersiscreated.Thiswillleadtoanincreasedsharedvisionamongsttheengineers,becausetheywillallfollowthesameprocessesandagreements. The uniformway ofworkingwill also lead to less reinvention of thewheel and redoingworkofpreviousshifts,sinceeveryengineerwillnowkeepbettertrackofwhattheyhavedoneintheirshift and will register all new solutions and tools. This will also finally improve knowledge transferbetween theshift teamsand increase theirperformance.Figure15presents the impactmodelof thefinalsolution.Thesolutiondesignandtherestof theresearcharereflected inChapter5:Conclusionsanddiscussion.

Figure15:Impactmodelfinalsolution

Finalsolutiondesign:newknowledgeviaOneNote,shifttransferandmeetings

Uniformwayofworking

OverviewofwhoknowswhatinOneNote

Moreinteraction,formalandinformal

Increasedtiestrength,trustandmotivation

Increasedsharedvision

Lessreinventionofthewheelandredoingworkofpreviousshifts

Improvedknowledgetransfer

andincreasedperformance

Facilitatedtransferoftacitandcomplexknowledge

48

5. Conclusions&DiscussionIn paragraph 5.1 the main research question is answered and the solution design is reflected. Thetheoretical implicationsarediscussed inparagraph5.2. Inparagraph5.3 thepractical implicationsarestated. Inthefinalparagraph,5.4,the limitationsoftheresearchandsuggestionsforfurtherresearchareelaborated.

5.1AnswermainresearchquestionIn the introduction of this thesis, a main research question is formulated, which is answered in thisparagraph.Themainresearchquestion,asstatedinparagraph1.3,wasthefollowing:

“HowshouldASMLadaptitsorganizationalandworkprocessesinordertoimproveknowledgetransferbetweenteamsthatworkinshifts?”

To answer the main research question, a thorough diagnosis of the current situation is performed.During the diagnostic phase the factors driving and hampering knowledge transfer between the shiftteams of TT5 are researched. Empirical evidence for all nine factors as proposed in the theoreticalframework is found, which were the following: knowledge tacitness and complexity (knowledgecharacteristics),networkstructure,sharedvision, tiestrength,andtrust (networkcharacteristics),andmotivation, disseminative capacity, and absorptive capacity (personal characteristics).On top of that,the theoretical framework is enhancedwith three additional factors: knowledge transfermechanism,overviewofwhoknowswhatandprocessandagreementsforknowledgetransfer.Afterevaluationwithmanagement,itisconfirmedthatthemainissuesarecausedbythefollowingfactors:tacitness,sharedvision,tiestrength,trust,motivation,knowledgetransfermechanisms,knowingwhatothersknowandaprocessforknowledgetransfer.

Itisdecidedwiththemanagerandateamleaderofthetestdepartmenttofocusthesolutiondesignondeveloping agreements with the engineers on what knowledge they should transfer and how theyshould transfer that knowledge to each other. The agreements are developed togetherwith the TT5engineers.TherecommendationistotransferallnewknowledgeonDN’s,tools,softwareandhardware,whichwillcontributetotheirperformanceandtroubleshootingskills.Theengineerswillbeusingthreedifferentmechanisms to transfer this knowledge: a knowledge-sharingplatform inOneNote, the shifttransfer,andTT5teammeetings.

Asstatedbefore,ASMLindicatedthattherewasalackofknowledgetransferandconfirmedthattherewere issues due to the following factors: the knowledge tacitness, a lacking shared vision, weak tiestrength,lackoftrust,lowmotivation,knowledgetransfermechanisms,notknowingwhatothersknowanda lackingprocess forknowledgetransfer.Thesolutiondesignsolves theproblemsthatASMLwasfacinginseveralways.Withthesolutiondesign,theknowledge-sharingplatformwilldirectlybringtheengineersup-to-datewiththelatestdevelopmentsthattookplaceoutsideoftheirworkinghours.Theonlineknowledge-sharingtoolwillprovidetheengineerswithagoodoverviewofwhattheircolleaguesknow. The engineerswill still have the shift transfer, as this is thebestmechanism to transfer issuesfromtheoutgoingshifttotheincomingshift.However,theyhavetoactivelydiscussthetopicsofthelistforhalfanhourinsteadofgoinghomeafterfiveminutes.Theknowledgesharingmeetingsarechosen

49

fortheengineerstogettoknoweachotherbetterandbuildatrustfulrelationship.Whentheengineersgettoknoweachotheronamorepersonallevel,theyareexpectedtobemoremotivatedtohelpeachotherandtheywillcreateasharedvision.Duringthemeetingstheengineerscandiscussdifferenttopicsandexperienceswitheachother.Theyhavemoretimetotransferknowledgeandthereforethetransferof tacitknowledge is facilitated.With these threetypesofmechanisms,moreknowledgetransferwilloccurandthebarriers,negativelyaffectingknowledgetransfer,areexpectedtodiminish.

5.2TheoreticalimplicationsThetheoreticalcontributionsofthisresearcharetwofold.Firstofall,atheoreticalframeworkisbuiltforthe drivers and barriers of knowledge transfer between shift teams. The research provides empiricalevidence for all nine proposed barriers and drivers of knowledge transfer: knowledge tacitness andcomplexity (knowledge characteristics), network structure, shared vision, tie strength, trust (networkcharacteristics), and motivation, disseminative capacity and absorptive capacity (personalcharacteristics). On top of that, the theoretical framework is enhancedwith three other factors thatwerefoundduringempiricalresearch:knowledgetransfermechanisms,knowingwhatothersknowandknowledgetransferprocess.

Secondly,itshedsnewempiricallightonovercomingthebarriersofknowledgetransferinashiftworkenvironment. The researchnotonlypresents thedrivers andbarriersof knowledge transferbetweenshift teams,butalsoprovidesapractical solutiondesign.Thesolutiondesign iscreated togetherwiththeengineerswhohavealotofexperiencewithworkinginashiftschedule.Withtheresearchastartingpointforfurtherresearchisprovided,whichiselaboratedinparagraph5.4.

5.3PracticalimplicationsThepractical implicationsconcerntherecommendationstowardsthemanagerofthetestdepartmentand the team leaders of the OPTE teams. The practical implications consist of two paragraphs.Paragraph 5.3.1 discusses the implications concerning the final solution design that is created in thisresearch.Paragraph5.3.2providestwoadditionalrecommendationstoimprovethecurrentsituationatASML.

5.3.1ImplicationsconcerningthesolutiondesignItisrecommendedtoimplementthesolutiondesignasstatedinparagraph4.2.5.Inordertoimplementthe final solutiondesign, several steps shouldbeexecuted.The first step for themanagerof the testdepartment and the involved team leaders is to inform the rest of the team leaders and the TT5engineers on the final solutiondesign and thenewagreements for knowledge transfer. To do this, ateammeetingwithallteamleadersandTT5engineersshouldbeorganizedinwhichthesolutiondesignisthoroughlyexplained.

ThesecondstepfortheengineersistofilloutOneNotefileasfaraspossible,suchthatthereisabasicOneNotefiletostartwith.SeveralTT5engineersalreadycreatedpersonalOneNotefilesandthesefilescanbecombined intoone file.ByassigningeachTT5engineer toasubject in theOneNote file,everyengineercarriestheresponsibilitytocheckifallinformationofthatsubjectisup-to-dateandcorrect.

50

Thethirdstepafteristodoapilottotestthesolutiondesign.Thepilotshouldcovereveryshiftcycleofallofthefiveshiftteams.Asstatedbefore,afullshiftcycleforaTT5shiftteamistendays.Thereforeitisproposedtodoapilot forat least fiveshiftcycles, thus fiftydays.During thepilotat leastoneTT5knowledge-sharingmeeting isorganizedandeveryengineer isexpectedtoworkaccordingtothefinalsolutiondesign.

Thefourthstepistoevaluatethepilotafterthepilotisfinished.Thisshouldbedonetocheckwhethertheprocessisfeasible,howmucheffortittakes,andifeverythingiscoveredandclear.Ontopofthat,duringtheevaluationitshouldbecheckedwhetherthebiggestissuesintheoldsituationareimprovedbythesolutiondesign.Forexample,inthecurrentsituationtheTT5engineersdonotknowwhattheircolleaguesexperiencedduringtheirshiftsandafterthepilot itcouldbecheckedifthis is improvedbythesolutiondesign.Basedontheremarksduringtheevaluation,thesolutiondesignshouldbeadjusted.

Thefinalstepistoimplementtheadjustedsolutiondesign.Thesolutiondesignshouldbeimplementedin the business process management structure of ASML and should be communicated to the otherinvolved stakeholders: VIS andOPTE. After implementation, it is important to check if the process isfollowedupuponandexecutedintherightway,andiftheprocessstillfitstheneedsofthemanager,teamleadersandengineers.Byregularlycheckingthis,theprocessiscontrolledandsustainable.

5.3.2AdditionalrecommendationsOn top of the practical implications concerning the solution design, two additional recommendationsare developed to improve the current situation at ASML. The first recommendation is to focus oncreatingateamgoalfortheengineers.Thefactthatthereisanunclearteamgoal,noapproachtoreachthegoalanddifferentways-of-workingintheteamsandcompetencescausealowsharedvision.Whenanetworkhasasharedvision,individualsinthenetworkhavethesameperceptiononhowtointeractwith each other. This promotes a mutual understanding and facilitates knowledge exchange. It canthereforebeseenasabondingmechanismforateam(Inkpen&Tsang,2005).Thiscanbeimprovedbyfor example introducing “superordinate” goals that provide the team members with incentives tointeract. Superordinate goals refer to goals that require individuals to cooperate to achieve the goal,which typically results in rewards to the teams (Argote, 2013; Sherif, 1958). This method reducestension and competition between people,which has also been stated as an issue in this research. Acontributionwouldbetocreatethesameway-of-workingineverycompetenceandteam,suchthatthedifferencesbetweenthegroupsarediminished.The focuspoint forthemanagerandteam leadersofTestandVISiscreatingsimilarways-of-workingineveryteamandcompetence.

Thesecondrecommendationistomakeuseoftemporarypersonnelmovement.Temporarypersonnelmovement is amechanism toenhance knowledge transfer and increaseexperienceworking together(Argote&Miron-Spektor, 2011; Inkpen&Tsang, 2005). Through temporarypersonnelmovement theengineersgainexperienceworkingtogetherandwiththattheydevelopasharedsenseofwhoknowswhatintheteam(Reagansetal.,2005).Themovementofpersonnelallowsforaneffectivemechanismtotransfertacitknowledgeandontopofthatitfacilitatesthedevelopmentofrelationships(Inkpen&Tsang, 2005; Reagans et al., 2005). Personnel transfers establish social network ties on top of moreformaltiesbetweenindividuals,andthesesocialnetworktiesfacilitatesocial interactionsandprovide

51

channelsforknowledgeexchange.Italsoenhancesthecreationofasharedcultureandtrust(Inkpen&Tsang,2005). In thebusinesscontext,personnelmovementcouldbedone in twodifferentways.Thefirstpossibilityistotransfertheengineersoftwoteamstothesameshiftsuchthattheyworktogetherdirectlywith each other. An example is transferring the engineer from team 1 to team 3 for one ormultipleshift cycle(s).Thisway theengineersget toknoweachother,can learn fromeachotherandbuildabetterrelationship;theydevelopexperienceworkingtogether.However,thiswouldmeanthatan engineer is not working his cycle and probably causing extra downtime on his original shift. Thesecondpossibilityisbyswitchingshiftsoftheengineers,forexampleswitchinganengineerfromteam1withanengineerfromteam3,whichchangestheorderofshifttransfers.Thisinfluencestheknowledgeflow and the network structure. It would provide the engineers with the exchange of differentknowledgeandexperience,anddifferentinteractionsandcloserrelationships.

5.4LimitationsandfutureresearchAlthoughtheresearchprovidedinsightinthedriversandbarrierstoknowledgetransferbetweenshiftteamsandasustainablesolutiondesigniscreated,thereareseverallimitationstotheresearch.Someoftheselimitationswillhowevercreateopportunitiesforfurtherresearch.Thelimitationsandsuggestionsforfurtherresearcharediscussedinthenextsections.

First of all, the research is conducted focusing on five small shift teamswithin a single organization,whileothershiftteamsinotherorganizationsmightfacesimilar issuesandpossiblyhavesolutionsforthis.Becauseof this, thegeneralizabilityof the research isdebatable.Even though thecollecteddataprovidesinsightsfortheissueswithknowledgetransferacrossshifts,itisnotclaimedthatthefindingsare representativeandgeneralizable forall shiftenvironments,becauseonly five shift teamswithinasingle organization are researched. However, since limited research is conducted in this area, it is ausefulstartingpointforfutureresearchthatfocusesonfacilitatingknowledgetransferandcollaborationin a shift work environment. Further research could include a comparison of different teams ordepartmentsacrossdifferentorganizations.

Secondly, this research only focuses on a single type of shift schedule, a so-called “rotating 5-shiftschedule”.Awidevariationofshiftschedulesisavailableandeachschedulehasitsowncomplicationsregarding knowledge transfer. These specific complicationsneed tobedeterminedbefore knowledgetransfercanbeimproved.However,itislikelythatissueswithtrust,tiestrengthandmotivationoccurinotherenvironmentswhenateamconsistsofmultipleshiftsandwherethereislimitedtimeforpeopletobuildatrustingrelationship.Duringtheresearchitisnoticedthatknowledgetransferisalsoanissueat VIS, while VIS has been working together for a much longer period than TT5 and they work in adifferent shift schedule than TT5. The VIS engineers have more meetings and longer shift transfers,leavingthemwithmoretimetobuildarelationshipandtotransferknowledgeface-to-face.However,VISalsoexperiencescompetitionbetweentheshiftteamsandalackoftrust;itisconfirmedbyseveralpeoplethattheyredotheworkofthepreviousshiftjustliketheTT5engineers.Ontopofthat,duringtheresearchanotherprojectstartedatassembly(ASSY)andtheseshiftteamsfacesimilarissuesasTT5.Thereforeitcanbestatedthattheresultscouldbegeneralizedtootherteamsanddepartmentswithin

52

ASML. Therefore it is assumed that these teams do not have good solutions for the issues they arefacingeitherandthattheresultscanbegeneralizedwithinASML.

Thirdly,ontopofthetwelvefactorsaffectingknowledgetransfertherecouldbemoreexplanationswhypeopledonottransferknowledge.Onlythefactorswithintheteamsaretakenintoaccount,howevertheexternalfactorsarenottakenintoaccount.Forexample,duringtheresearchareorganizationtookplace.Thiscouldhaveledtopeoplebeingscaredlosingtheirjobsandcausedthemtobeprotectiveoftheirownknowledge,becausetheybelievethatknowledgeispower.Anotherfactorthatcouldhaveaninfluence on knowledge transfer that is not taken into account is the culturewithin ASML. As statedbefore,itismentionedthatsimilarissuesoccuratVISandASSY.Thereforeitcouldbethattheculturewithinthecompanycausescompetitionbetweenteamsandindividuals,butthis isalsonottakenintoaccountduringtheresearchandcouldberesearchedinthefuture.

Finally, the final impact of the solution design on the performance of the engineers could not bemeasured,duetotheunstablestateofTT5andthecurrentway-of-working.Currently,ASMLusestwokeyperformance indicators (KPI’s) todetermine theperformanceof theTT5engineers: solving speedandsolvingpower.SolvingspeedreferstothetimeittakestosolveaDN.SolvingpoweristheamountofDN’sthatissolvedbyTT5comparedtothetotalamountofDN’ssolvedinthefactory,representedinapercentage.Therearehowevertwo issueswithmeasuringperformanceusingthecurrentKPI’s.Thefirst issue is that the team TT5 is founded quite recently and is still unstable. The way of workingchangesoften,thereareengineersjoiningandleavingeveryfewmonthsandTT5isstillintheirtrainingperiodduringtheexecutingoftheresearch.ThefactthatTT5hasnotreachedastablephaseyetmakesit difficult todoaquantitativemeasure. The second issue concerns theway-of-workingof TT5at themoment.Theagreementsfortheway-of-workingarenotverystrictandarenotalwaysadheredto.Asstated before, solving speed measures the time to solve a DN. However, a novice engineer wouldescalatethemorecomplexDN’stothenext linewhileamoreexpertengineerwouldtrytosolvethiscomplexDN. The results of this performancemeasure are the contrary towhat is expected. There isexpectedthatthemoreexperiencedanengineeris,thefasterthesolvingspeed.Thismeansthatsolvingspeed at thismoment in time is not a good indicator for performance. There is a similar issue withsolvingpower.Although itwasnotpossibleduringthis research,quantitativeanalysiscouldbeanextsteptotakeaftertherecommendationsareimplemented.Aproposalwouldbetousethemeasurethatisproposedinparagraph2.1.However,beforethismeasurecanbeused,therearefactorsthatneedtobecontrolledfor.Firstofall,TT5shouldbefinishedwiththeirtrainingperiodatVIS.Secondly,thewayofworkingofTT5shouldbeclearandtheagreementsthataremadeshouldbeadheredto.Eventhoughthefinal impactofthesolutiondesignontheperformanceoftheengineerscouldnotbemeasured, itcouldbecheckedwhether the issues theywere facingarediminishedor resolveddue to thesolutiondesign.

53

BibliographyArgote, L. (2013).Organizational Learning: Creating, Retaining and Transferring Knowledge. Springer

Science&BusinessMedia.

Argote,L.,&Epple,D.(1990).Learningcurvesinmanufacturing.Science,920-924.

Argote, L., & Ingram, P. (2000). Knowledge Transfer: A Basis for Competitive Advantage in Firms.OrganizationalBehaviorandHumanDecisionProcesses,150-169.

Argote, L., & Miron-Spektor, E. (2011). Organizational Learning: From Experience to Knowledge.OrganizationScience,1123-1137.

Argote, L., Ingram, P., Levine, J. M., &Moreland, R. L. (2000). Knowledge Transfer in Organizations:LearningfromtheExperienceofOthers.OrganizationalBehaviorandHumanDecisionProcesses,1-8.

Bosua, R., & Venkitachalam, K. (2015). Fostering knowledge transfer and learning in shift workenvironments.Knowledgeandprocessmanagement,22-33.

Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning andInnovation.AdministrativeScienceQuarterly,128-152.

Galbraith,C.S.(1990).Transferringcoremanufacturingtechnologiesinhightechnologyfirms.CaliforniaManagementReview,56-70.

Gupta, A. K., & Govindaranjan, V. (2000). Knowledge management's social dimension: Lessons fromNucorSteel.SloanManagementReview,71-80.

Hansen,M.T. (1999).Thesearch-transferproblem:Theroleofweakties insharingknowledgeacrossorganizationsubunits.AdministrativeScienceQuarterly,82-111.

Inkpen,A.C.,&Tsang,E.W.(2005).Socialcapital,networks,andknowledgetransfer.TheAcademyofManagementReview,146-165.

King,W. (2009).Knowledgemanagement and organizational learning. Dordrecht heiderlberg LondonNewYork:Springerscienceandbusinessmedia.

Levin,D.Z.,&Cross,R.(2004).TheStrengthofWeakTiesYouCanTrust:TheMediatingRoleofTrustinEffectiveKnowledgeTransfer.ManagementScience,1477-1490.

Nonaka, I. (1994).ADynamicTheoryofOrganizationalKnowledgeCreation.OrganizationScience ,14-37.

Nonaka,I.(1991).Theknowledge-creatingcompany.HarvardBusinessReview,96-104.

54

Osterloh, M., & Frey, B. S. (2000). Motivation, Knowledge Transfer, and Organizational Forms.OrganizationScience,538-550.

Parent, R., Roy, M., & St. Jacques, D. (2007). A systems-based dynamic knowledge transfer capacitymodel.JournalofKnowledgeManagement,81-93.

Polanyi,M.(1966).Thetacitdimension.London:Routledge&KeganPaul.

Reagans,R.,&McEvily,B. (2003).Network structureandknowledge transfer:Theeffectsof cohesionandrange.AdministrativeScienceQuarterly,240-267.

Reagans, R., Argote, L., & Brooks, D. (2005). Individual Experience and experience working together:predicting learning rates from knowing who knows what and knowing how to work together.ManagementScience,869-881.

Santoro,M. D., & Saparito, P. A. (2006). Self-Interest Assumption and Relational Trust in University-IndustryKnowledgeTransfers.IEEETransactionsonEngineeringManagement,335-347.

Sherif, M. (1958). Superordinate Goals in the Reduction of Intergroup Conflict. American Journal ofSociology,349-356.

Simon, H. A. (1962). The architecture of complexity. Proceedings of the American PhilosophicalAssociation,467-482.

Sorenson,O.,Rivkin, J.W.,&Fleming, L. (2006).Complexity,networksandknowledge flow.ResearchPolicy,994-1017.

Szulanski,G.(2000).AProcessofKnowledgeTransfer:ADiachronicAnalysisofStickiness.OrganizationalBehaviorandHumanDecisionProcesses,9-27.

Szulanski,G.(1996).Exploringinternalstickness:Impedimentstothetransferofbestpracticewithinthefirm.StrategicManagementJournal,27-43.

Tsai,W. (2001).KnowledgeTransfer in IntraorganizationalNetworks:EffectsofNetworkPositionand.TheAcademyofManagementJournal,996-1004.

van Aken, J. E., Berends, H., & van der Bij, H. (2007). Problem Solving in Organizations. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

vanWijk,R., Jansen, J. J.,&Lyles,M.A. (2008). Inter-and Intra-OrganizationalKnowledgeTransfer:AMeta-Analytic Review and Assessment of its Antecedents and Consequences. Journal ofManagementStudies,830-853.

Yin,R.K.(2009).CaseStudyResearch;DesignandMethods.LosAngeles:SagePublications.

Zander,U.,&Kogut,B.(1995).Knowledgeandthespeedofthetransferandimitationoforganizationalcapabilities:Anempiricaltest.OrganizationScience,76-92.

55

AppendixA:SearchapproachThisappendixdiscussestheliteraturesearchapproach.Theprocessstartedwithgainingknowledgeontheunderlyingconceptoftheresearch:organizational learning.Beforeunderstandinghowpeoplecanlearn from each other, it is important to find out what learning is and how it occurs within anorganization.Thereforethetopicoforganizationallearningisresearchedfirst;itformsthebasisforthetheoretical framework. After this, the topic of knowledge transfer is thoroughly researched. The laststep isdiscoveringwhatmakesshift teamsdifferentand linking the results to the topicofknowledgetransfer.Throughthissearchtenarticlesareselected.Twodifferentapproacheswereused(VanAkenetal.,2007):(1)theuseofsearchenginesand(2)thesnowballmethod.Thesetwoapproachesarediscussedinmoredetailinthenexttwosections.

1. SearchEnginesThe first searchmethodthat isused is searching literaturewithsearchengines.Examplesofscholarlydatabases that are used areABI/Inform,Google Scholar, JSTOR, ProQuest, andManagement Science.Firstofall,thesearchstringsareusedtosearchtheentiredatabase.Sinceallsearchstringsresultedinahighnumberofpapers,selectioncriteriaaresetup.Thesecriteriaarethefollowing:

- Journalarticle- Publishedafter1990- Publishedinoneofthefollowingjournals(alljournalshaveanimpactfactorof3orhigher):

o OrganizationScienceo ManagementScienceo JournalofManagementStudieso JournalofOperationsManagement

Afterthis,thenumberofpotentialpaperssignificantlydiminished.Thetitleofeverypotentialpaperisreadandaselectionismadebasedontopicrelevanceandlevelofanalysisandthentheabstractisread.Forexample, thepapers thatdiscuss inter-organizational knowledge transferhaveadifferent levelofanalysisthanthisresearch,whichconcernsintra-organizationalknowledgetransfer.Afterfiltering,ninepapersareselectedformingthebasisofthetheoreticalframework.Table13presentsthesearchstrings,totalnumberofpapers,numberofpotentialpapersandnumberofselectedpapers.Table13:Searchstrings

Subject Searchstring Totalpapers(#)

Potentialpapers(#)

Selectedpapers(#)

Keywords:Organizationallearning

“Organizationallearning”“Learningfromexperience”“Organizationallearning”AND“Knowledgemanagement”“Organizationallearning”ANDmechanisms“Organizationallearning”ANDdrivers

61,73412,998

16,56228,42014,142

13410

420

12---

Knowledge “Knowledgetransfer” 65,952 100 3

56

transfer “Knowledgetransfer”ANDorganizations“Intra-organizational”AND“knowledgetransfer”“Knowledgetransfer”AND“organizationallearning”“Knowledgetransfer”ANDmechanisms“Knowledgetransfer”ANDdrivers“Knowledgetransfer”ANDantecedents

46,5536,066

9,452

26,15014,26041,087

81

3

101

-1---1

Shiftwork “Shiftwork”“Shiftwork”AND“hand-off”“Shiftwork”ANDtransfer“Shiftwork”AND“knowledgetransfer”“Shiftwork”ANDlearning“Shiftwork”AND“organizationallearning”

23,282269

3,575186

4,824316

100000

------

Theselectedpapersthroughliteraturesearcharethefollowing:- Argote,L.,&Miron-Spektor,E.(2011).OrganizationalLearning:FromExperiencetoKnowledge.

OrganizationScience,1123-1137.- Inkpen, A. C., & Tsang, E. W. (2005). Social capital, networks, and knowledge transfer. The

AcademyofManagementReview,146-165.- Levin,D.Z.,&Cross,R.(2004).TheStrengthofWeakTiesYouCanTrust:TheMediatingRoleof

TrustinEffectiveKnowledgeTransfer.ManagementScience,1477-1490.- Osterloh,M.,&Frey,B.S. (2000).Motivation,KnowledgeTransfer,andOrganizationalForms.

OrganizationScience,538-550.- Reagans, R., Argote, L., & Brooks, D. (2005). Individual Experience and experience working

together: predicting learning rates fromknowingwho knowswhat and knowinghow toworktogether.ManagementScience,869-881.

- Tsai, W. (2001). Knowledge Transfer in Intraorganizational Networks: Effects of NetworkPositionand.TheAcademyofManagementJournal,996-1004.

- van Wijk, R., Jansen, J. J., & Lyles, M. A. (2008). Inter- and Intra-Organizational KnowledgeTransfer:AMeta-AnalyticReviewandAssessmentofitsAntecedentsandConsequences.JournalofManagementStudies,830-853.

- Zander, U., & Kogut, B. (1995). Knowledge and the speed of the transfer and imitation oforganizationalcapabilities:Anempiricaltest.OrganizationScience,76-92.

2. SnowballmethodAftersearchingliteraturewithsearchengines,theso-called‘snowball’methodisused(VanAkenetal.,2007).AccordingtoVanAkenetal.(2007)thesnowballmethodcanbeexecutedintwoways:backwardandforward.Bothmethodsareappliedduringtheliteraturereview.Backwardsnowballingisexecutedto study the origins and development of constructs and to identify experts in the topic of research.Forwardsnowballingisperformedtoidentifynewfindingsandextendknowledgeonatopic.

57

Thereference listsof the listofpapers,asstatedabove,arecheckedandnewcitationsarereviewed.Eachtimeanew,potentiallyinterestingpaperorbookwasfound,theabstractwasreadandbasedonthe level of analysis, journal impact factor, and the topic and context relevanceapaperor bookwasselected.

58

AppendixB:StakeholderanalysisandintervieweesA stakeholder analysis is done to get anunderstandingof thepeople involved in the research. Threeaspectsareanalyzed.Thefirstaspect,commitment/enthusiasm,isillustratedonthex-axis.Thesecondaspect,importance,isdepictedonthey-axis.Therelativeinfluenceisreflectedbytheballsize.

Fourstakeholdergroupsaredefined:theTT5engineers,themanagerofthetestdepartment,thetestteamleadersandtheVISengineers.TheresultsofthestakeholderanalysisaredepictedinFigure16.

Figure16:Stakeholderanalysis

The TT5 engineers are themost valuable stakeholders in terms of the importance of the change forthem, since this research has an impact on the way they are working. They are also committed tochangethecurrentsituation;howevertheyareatthesametimehesitantforthesamereason,namelyitislikelythattheyarenotfullycommittedbecausetheirwayofworkingwillprobablychangebecauseofthis research. Their influence is also high since their input is used for the solution. According to theanalysisitisimportanttoenlisttheirhelp.

Themanagerofthetestdepartment is themost important intermsof influenceandhiscommitmenttowards the project. Themanager is the onemaking the final decision. His commitment is very highbecauseherecognizestheproblemanditisimportanttocomeupwithasolutionforit.Hisimportanceisrankedasaverage,becauseitdoesnotinfluencehiswayofworkingdirectly,butitinfluencesthewayofworkingofthepeopleinhisdepartment.Itisgoodtoenlisthishelpwhenneeded.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Impo

rtan

cecha

nge

Commitment/Enthusiasm

Testteamleaders ManagertestdepartmentTT5engineers VISengineers

Keepinformed

Addressconcerns Enlisttheirhelp

Involveasneeded

[Ballsizereflectsrelaqveinfluence]

59

It is also important to enlist help from the test team leaders, since their commitment towards theprojectishigh,aswellastheirimportanceandinfluence.

Finally,VISengineersarealsostakeholdersand their importance, influenceandcommitmentare low.Thisisbecausetheirworkisnotimpactedbythechangeandthereforetheirinfluenceandcommitmentarelow.Thismeansthattheyareonlyinformedabouttheresearchbutnotinvolved.Forlearningmoreaboutthecompetencesandforverification,twoVISengineersareinterviewed.

IntheTable14anoverviewoftheinterviewees,theteamtheyareinandthecompetencetheyworkforisprovided.Fictivenamesareusedfortheteamssuchthatanonymityisensured.

Table14:Overviewinterviewees

Interviewee Team CompetenceManagertestdepartment - -Seniorteamleader Test-Alpha -Progressteamleader Test-Delta -Peopleteamleader Test-Gamma -TT5Engineer Test-Beta ME&SQTT5Engineer Test-Beta ILL&CT/ELTT5Engineer Test-Gamma WS/WH&RS/RHTT5Engineer Test-Gamma ILL&CT/ELTT5Engineer Test-Epsilon WS/WH&RS/RHTT5Engineer Test-Epsilon ILL&CT/ELTT5Engineer Test-Delta ME&SQTT5Engineer Test-Delta WS/WH&RS/RHTT5Engineer Test-Alpha ME&SQTT5Engineer Test-Alpha WS/WH&WHVISEngineer VIS-Kappa SQVISEngineer VIS-Lambda ILL

60

AppendixC:InterviewprotocolsAsexplained insection3.1, therearetwodifferentprotocolsusedforthe interviews.Theseprotocolsarebasedonthedifferentrolesoftheintervieweestowardsknowledgetransfer.

InterviewprotocolteamleadersandmanagersIntroduction

- Welcometotheinterview,thankyouforyourtime- Introductionoftheinterviewer- Goal of the project: The goal of the project is to give ASML recommendations on how

knowledgetransferbetweenshiftscanbeimproved.- Goaloftheinterview:Thereareseveralgoalsforthisinterview.Firstofall,aDNprocessmapis

createdandthisneedstobeverified.Secondly,thegoal istogetagoodunderstandingofthecurrent situation by seeingwhat is being transferred at themoment, whichmechanisms areused,whattheagreementsareandwhatthemotivesbehindthatare.Thelastgoalistocheckiftherearethingsthatwouldliketheintervieweeseebeingtransferredinthefuture.

- Everythingthatwillbesaidduringtheinterviewisanonymous- Askpermissiontorecordtheinterviewfordatacollection- Askforashortintroductionoftheinterviewee

DNprocess[ExplicationDNprocess]IsthisthecorrectDNprocess?(showflowchart)Isthereadifferencebetweenknowledgetransferofknownandnewdisturbances?AgreementsWhatdoesTT5havetotransfer?Whatarethecurrentagreements?Arethereanyagreementsaboutwhattransfermechanismyoushoulduse?ExpectationsWhatdoyouexpectfromthisproject?Whatareimportantcriteriafortherecommendation?Would you like to see a solution that focuses on one competence or one that can be applied to allcompetences?CurrenttofuturesituationWhatdoyouseefromknowledgetransferbetweenTT5teams?Are you satisfied with knowledge transfer between TT5 teams at thismoment in time? If not, whatcouldbeimproved?WouldyouliketoaddsomethingthatIhavenotmentionedinthisinterview?

61

InterviewprotocolEngineersIntroduction

- Welcometotheinterview,thankyouforyourtime- Introductionoftheinterviewer- Goal of the project: The goal of the project is to give ASML recommendations on how

knowledgetransferbetweenshiftscanbeimproved.- Goaloftheinterview:Thereareseveralgoalsforthisinterview.Firstofall,aDNprocessmapis

createdandthisneedstobeverified.Secondly,thegoal istogetagoodunderstandingofthecurrent situation by seeing what is being transferred at themoment, whichmechanisms areused,whattheagreementsareandwhatthemotivesbehindthatare.Thelastgoalistocheckiftherearethingsthattheintervieweewouldliketoseebeingtransferredinthefuture.

- Everythingthatwillbesaidduringtheinterviewisanonymous- Askpermissiontorecordtheinterviewfordatacollection- Askforashortintroductionoftheinterviewee

DNprocess[ExplicationDNprocess]IsthisthecorrectDNprocess?(showflowchart)Isthereadifferencebetweenknowledgetransferofknownandnewdisturbances?KnowledgeWhat kind of knowledge do you get from working the process? At which point do you gain mostknowledge?Whatkindofknowledgedoyougetfromthemeetingsorone-on-oneswithVIS?Whatdoyoutransferanddiscussatthemomentintheshifttransfer?What do you transfer to your TT5 colleagues after face-to-face knowledge transfer/meetings withothers?Whatdoyoutransferafterday-to-dayoperations?Isthereadifferencebetweenoutofspec,errororother(workmanship)relatedissues/disturbances?Howdoyoudeterminewhattotransfer?Agreements/ProcessWhatdoyouhavetotransfer?Whatarethecurrentagreements?Arethereanyagreementsaboutwhattransfermechanismyoushoulduse?MechanismsHowdoyoutransferknowledgeatthemoment?Why?Is thereadifferencebetweenthe transfersofdifferent typesofknowledge?Differencebetweenhowyoutransferday-to-dayoperationknowledgeversusknowledgeyougainfrommeetings?Whendoyoutransfer?Doyoudothatrightaftermeetingorattheendoftheshift?Howoftenpershiftdoyoutransferknowledge?Whomdoyoutransferto?

62

CurrenttofuturesituationAre you satisfied with knowledge transfer between TT5 teams at thismoment in time? If not, whatcouldbeimproved?Aretherethingsyouwouldliketoseebeingtransferredthatcurrentlyarenot?Why?WouldyouliketoaddsomethingthatIhavenotmentionedinthisinterview?

63

AppendixD:InterviewquotesInTable15theinterviewquotesarestated.Itstartswiththenumberofthequote,indicatedby“#”,thetypeofcharacteristics(knowledge,networkorpersonal),thefactorandthecorrespondingquoteoftheinterviewee.

Table15:Interviewquotes

# Characteristics Factor Interviewee Quote

1 Knowledge Tacitness 1 Experiencedengineerscanjustlookatanissueandknowwhattheproblemisandhowtosolveit,basedonexperience.

2 Knowledge Tacitness 1 Ilearnmostbydoingit,day-to-dayoperation.3 Knowledge Tacitness 2 Ifyouhavemoreknowledgeyoucanestimatewheretheissueislocated,so

youapproachthesolutionfasterthanothers.4 Knowledge Tacitness 3 Youcanfindknowledgeonthetheoryorthinkingpatternbehindsolvingan

issue.5 Knowledge Tacitness 4 Tomeitiscommonsense.BysittingwithVISyoulearntheirwayofthinking

andanalyzing.6 Knowledge Tacitness 5 It is all common sense. You either have the ability to troubleshoot or you

don’t.7 Knowledge Tacitness 6 Thismeansthatyouneedtoknowalittlebitwhatyouaredoingandgetthe

feelingforit.8 Knowledge Tacitness 6 Atthisstageitisbasicallylearningbydoing,learningbyexperience.9 Knowledge Tacitness 7 Theknowledgeisinmyheadanditisdifficulttoexplaintoothers10 Knowledge Tacitness 8 You learn how to troubleshoot. Everyone has their own way of

troubleshooting.11 Knowledge Tacitness 9 Igainnewknowledgefromsolvingissuesmyself,withorwithoutthehelpof

VIS.12 Knowledge Tacitness 10 Ilearnthemostfromday-to-dayoperation.Ilearnhowtoapproachissues.13 Knowledge Complexity 1 I learnthemost inthepartwherethe issue isnotknown, I’dhavetothink

about the issue. It requires an analysis and ruling out some parts, makingdecisions,takingrisks.

14 Knowledge Complexity 2 We learn how to approach and analyze and how to think about everypossibility. It canbehardware, software,humanerrors…Therearea lotofpossibilitieswheretheproblemislocated.

15 Knowledge Complexity 3 Thereisalotofknowledgeavailableindatabases,butitisunstructured.Youcanreadaboutoldissues,presentationsofhardware,software,oldmachinetypes,newmachinetypes,differencesbetweenthemachinetypes,howtestswork, how measuring systems work, functionalities of components in themachines,tipsandtricks,etc.

16 Knowledge Complexity 4 SittingwithVISmeansthatyoucanwatchhowtheytroubleshoot,especiallywith the more complex issues. Their ideas, talking with them, workingtogether…Itaffectsmygeneralknowledge.

17 Knowledge Complexity 5 Don’tforgetthateverythingisverycomplex.Youareconstantlylearningwiththe new machine technologies. Every year there are new systems beingmade.

64

# Characteristics Factor Interviewee Quote

18 Knowledge Complexity 6 Youarebeinggivenaproblemandyouhaveasetfromknownsolutionsthathavenotsolvedit.YouarestartingwithIhavetriedeverythingthatsolveditin the past, but it’s not helping so it is not solving it. So it needs to besomethingtostartlookinginabroaderlinethanthefishbone.Alongthewayyou learn somethingnew, itmightbeapartof themachine that youhaveneverthoughtaboutorseenbefore.

19 Knowledge Complexity 7 TherearenewDN’s thatyouneed toanalyze further.Youcanbut it isnotstructured, that’s theproblemaswell. It is like this is abunchof trainings,information,graphs,dataandthen“goodluck”.

20 Knowledge Complexity 9 With new issues we have to start with analyzing and think about whichdirection to go. Knowing how the machine works is the most importantknowledgetohave. Ifyouaregoingtomeasure,youhavetoknowwhattoexpect.

21 Network Networkstructure

1 Itransferthattomyteam,mytestteam.

22 Network Networkstructure

3 Dependingonhowimportantitis,IwillonlytalktomyownTT5shift.

23 Network Networkstructure

6 It is conflictingyougotanother teamwithina team.Butbeingoneperson,yourteamistheothershift.Itismaybebetterifwelookatisasoneteam.

24 Network Networkstructure

8 TT5isateamonitsown,butateamthatworksinshifts.

25 Network Sharedvision 1 Everythingisbasedonyourownrequest.ItwouldbenicetohavesomesortofmeetingwithTT5tositdownanddiscusswhatwehavelearnedsofarandtalkabouteachother’sthinkingprocessesandlearnandtogettoknowthat.

26 Network Sharedvision 2 Every time during the TT5 meetings I hear a new way of working. It ischangingalot.Alsoeverycompetencehastheirownwayofworking.

27 Network Sharedvision 5 Othercompetencesdoitdifferently.28 Network Sharedvision 6 There are people with different levels of education, different levels of

securityinsociety.Therearealotofpeoplescaredoflosingtheirjobssoyougot that competitiveness in there as well. There is no team goal and weneverhadachancetositdownandtalkaboutit.

29 Network Sharedvision 6 Every competenceworks slightly different. Also the TT5 teams. Should wenotstandardizethisasagoodideaandroll itoutacrossall5teams,beforeyougot5teamsdoing5differentthingsagain.Thatcompetitionthing.

30 Network Sharedvision 7 Eachteamhastheirowndifferenceanddoestheirownthing.31 Network Sharedvision 8 Everyonehastheirownwayoftroubleshooting.32 Network Tiestrength 2 Ionlysendknowledgetoourshift;Idon’tsendinformationtootherTT5’ers.33 Network Tiestrength 3 TT5isfoundedrecently,2shiftteamsIhardlyseeand2shiftteamsIseeall

the time. These last teams I know personally. I am reluctantwith people Idon’tknowthatwell.Ithinkthatmighthavesomethingtodowithtrust.

34 Network Tiestrength 4 Ihardlyseetheothershifts,soIdon’tsharealotwiththem.Idosharealotinmyownteam.

35 Network Tiestrength 6 You do get a solid transfer with the two teams you see more often, butobviously theyalsotake itdownthechainandtheytransfer it to theotherones.

36 Network Tiestrength 7 Idotwodaystransferwiththeseguysandthenwetalkalotmore,andthenyou becomemore personal; you get to know each other and get to bond.Withtheothertwoshiftsyoutalkaswell,butyoudon’thavethatbond.

65

# Characteristics Factor Interviewee Quote

37 Network Tiestrength 8 The transfers with the team before and after me are good, because youpersonallyknowthem.Thereisadifferencewiththeotherteamsbecauseyousee them a lot less. Our shift team is very close and that helps a lot withknowledgetransfer.

38 Network Tiestrength 9 Tomethereisnotarealdifferencebetweentheshifttransferswiththeteamsyouseemoreoftenandtheonesyouseelessoften.

39 Network Tiestrength 10 Becauseyouseethemless,youdiscussless40 Network Trust 3 Tomeitmakessensethatifyouseepeoplelessoften,thereislesstrust.Itisa

bottleneckintheprocess. Ifyoudon’ttrustsomeonetointerpret ittherightway,itcouldhaveseriousconsequences.

41 Network Trust 5 Somepeoplejustdon’tknowexactlywhatishappening.42 Network Trust 6 There iscompetitionbetweentheshifts,whichIcallnegative.Youaretrying

to be better than the other shifts, which maybe stops you transferringknowledgebecauseyoudon’twanttogivetheknowledgetotheothershift.Everybodyistryingtobebetterthaneverybodyelse.

43 Network Trust 8 Youdiscussmoreandlongerwiththeteamsyouseemoreoftenandyoualsogetmorethingsfromthem.

44 Personal Motivation 1 Itrytotransferasmuchaspossible45 Personal Motivation 2 Forme,withsomeshiftsIamreallyshortduringtheshifttransfer:“DN’s?No

DN’s.Okseeyou,haveaniceday”.46 Personal Motivation 3 Idon’tsharethis.TT5isjustfounded;Ionlyknowhalfofthepeople.Withthe

peopleIknowIcansensewhethertheyareinterested.47 Personal Motivation 4 I only see people after my or their night shift and if I am ready with DN

transfer after 10minutes, I go home. These shift transfers are really short.Nobodyenjoysstayingforanothertwentyminutes.

48 Personal Motivation 5 DuringtheshifttransferIalsowanttogohome,soItrytokeepitasshortaspossible.

49 Personal Motivation 6 Ifyougotthetimeandsomethinginterestingtotalkabout,youwilltalkaboutit.ButIamapersonaswellsosometimesit’slike:Iwanttogohome.

50 Personal Motivation 7 Youwanttoshareit,butdon’tknowifitisusefulforthemandtheywanttoknowit.Especiallyafteranightshift:youwanttogohome.

51 Personal Motivation 8 Nobodywantstostayanhourextraaftertheirshift,soyoukeepitshortandyougohome.

52 Personal Motivation 10 Maybeitwouldbegoodtohaveacentralknowledgepoint,becauseyoudon’tseeeveryshiftasoftensothereislessdiscussion.

53 Personal Disseminativecapacity

1 I try to transfer as much as possible, although it is sometimes difficult toexplainknowledge

54 Personal Disseminativecapacity

2 Iwanttobeclearandshort.

55 Personal Disseminativecapacity

3 Itdependsontheperson.Forexample,ItalktoomuchsoIalsosharealot.Myown fault however is that I need to domy administration prior to the shifttransfer,suchthattheshifttransferisshortandclear.Iwouldn’tbesurprisedifothersstruggledbecauseofthat.

56 Personal Disseminativecapacity

5 SomeDNtransfersIgetarenotcomplete.

57 Personal Disseminativecapacity

6 EveryTT5’erIhavemetiscompetent,butitiscomingbacktothesamething,theindividual.Iwillopenlygointothediscussion,buteverybodyisdifferent.

58 Personal Disseminativecapacity

7 IamnotverystructuralpersontobelikeokIputeverythinghereandthisisaboutthisandthis isaboutthat,so Idon'tshare it.Mymethodsofsharingareverybad.

66

# Characteristics Factor Interviewee Quote59 Personal Disseminative

capacity9 Generalknowledgeisdifficulttotransfer;Idon’tknowhowtoimprovethat.

60 Personal Disseminativecapacity

9 Obviouslyyouarenotthinkingclearafteranightshift,soitcouldbethatyousometimesforgetthings.

61 Personal Disseminativecapacity

10 Ialsohadbusynightshiftsandtheshifttransferismorehecticthanwhenitisquiet.WhenIambusyIdidnothavetimetocheckeverythingandthenIcannottellalot,becauseIamworkingoneverythingatonceandIlosetrackofit.

62 Personal Absorptivecapacity

1 Theonlyproblemisthatif it isacomplexissueforhimthisinformationwillbe processed but in a week also forgotten. It is easier to absorb theinformationfacetofacethanfromreadingane-mail.

63 Personal Absorptivecapacity

2 Ifyoutelltoomuchinformationyoudon’treallygetitsometimes.

64 Personal Absorptivecapacity

3 I have experienced that the person who is in the next shift did notunderstandsomethingItransferred.

65 Personal Absorptivecapacity

4 Most of the time I have the feeling that the knowledge I transfer isunderstood.Theonlydifficulty iswithtransferonpaper,becauseyoudon’tgetanyquestionsorfeedbackandyouhavetoassumethattheotherpersonunderstandsyou.

66 Personal Absorptivecapacity

5 Most of the things have been sent around once, but it disappears in yourinbox,becauseyougetsomuchmail.

67 Personal Absorptivecapacity

6 Iprefer to talk to somebody,because I comeoutof thatgenerationwhereinformationwasverbalandnottextual.70%ofcommunicationisn’tverbal,itis non-verbal. I miss the non-verbal communication. Reading something,whatdoyouthinkandalsoreadingsomebodyelse’swork.

68 Personal Absorptivecapacity

7 So I’m just spending toomuch effortand it goes right ear in, left ear out.(withOPTE)

69 Personal Absorptivecapacity

8 Iamsurethateveryonegetsthetransferredknowledge.Peoplesometimesforgetthings.

70 - Mechanisms 1 To be honest, knowledge transfer is rather poor and seldom. It is usuallydoneintheshifttransfer.Facetofacetransfer isalwaysbetterforme. It iseasier to explain face to face, verbally. Writing an email leaves space forinterpretation and can be ambiguous. If you ask questions in an email youcanexpectareply inafewdays.Withverbaltransfersyoucanaskdirectly,explaineverything,andaskfordetails, it iseasiertoabsorbtheinformationfacetoface.Emailsdisappearsomewhere;yougetsomanyemailsonadailybasis.

71 - Mechanisms 2 Shift transfer to talk about everything that happened during the shift.Sometimes I just sendemails if thenext shift isnotavailable. If it is a longstoryintheemail,Idon’treadit.Facetofaceitisok.

72 - Mechanisms 3 AlotissentviathecompetencemailofVISandTT5isintheretoo.However,youreceivealotofemails,let’ssay:Iwasgonefor8daysandIreceived300emails fromthecompetenceemail.Whenyoutransferfacetoface,oneonone,youcanseewhethertheotherpersonunderstandsitandviaemailyoudon’tnecessarilyhearanythingbackorgetfeedback.

73 - Mechanisms 4 Hardly any shift transfers, only after my night shift. And then you do notsharealot.Isendemailsasshifttransfers,noproblemswiththis.

67

# Characteristics Factor Interviewee Quote74 - Mechanisms 5 ThetransferinTT5isalwaysthroughemailandface-to-face.Emailsrarely

happen,onceortwiceperweek.Youalsogetsomanyemails,sometimesthingshavebeensentaroundoncebuttheydisappearinyourinbox.Therestofthetransferisdonethroughtalking.Sometimesyoufindoutthingsafter2weeks,becausethereisadifferencewithshiftsbetweenTT5andVIS.Thentheywillexplainsomethinginameeting,butyoucannotalwaysbepresent.

75 - Mechanisms 6 Theonlytransferthereis,noneofthis isstructured, isverballyyoudoyourshifttransfer.ThereisnospecificTT5meeting.Iprefertotalktosomebody.Ireceive a lot of emails, but I don’t receive a lot of emails on knowledgetransferthatreallycapturemyattention.

76 - Mechanisms 7 Sometimeswesendemails.DuringtheshifttransferyoutalkabouttheopenDN’sandsometimesaboutotherthingstoo,itdependsontheguy.

77 - Mechanisms 8 Allknowledgetransferisduringtheshifttransfer.Thismeansthatmostthingsaresharedduringtheshifttransfer.Itoccurssometimesthatanemailissent,becausethenthewholeteamgetsit,eventhepeoplewhoareillorabsent.

78 - Mechanisms 9 Shift transfer is the only moment I see TT5 colleagues. It occasionallyhappens that we send an email. If it is completely new for VIS, it will bediscussed during one of their meetings. However, this does not reacheveryonefromTT5becausenoteveryonecanattendthemeetings.

79 - Mechanisms 10 OccasionallyIsendoutanemail.DuringtheshifttransferyouonlytalkabouttheopenDN’s.

80 - Knowing whatothersknow

3 Sometimesyouhear somethingand thenyouaresurprised that theyknowthat.Butmaybeeverybodyalreadyknowsit,buttheyjustdon’ttellyou.

81 - Knowing whatothersknow

5 Thereisnooverviewofwhoknowswhat.ItoccursthatpeopleknowaboutatoolingthatIhaveneverseenbefore.

82 - Knowing whatothersknow

7 I don’t send it to the other teams, because maybe they already have theinformation, so I don’t send it to other teams. I don’t like spamming thewholedepartment.

83 - Knowing whatothersknow

9 Thenyou’dhavetoknowwhattheyknowmorethanyou.

84 - ProcessKT 1 TherearenoagreementsIbelieve.Itisbasedonyourownrequest.Thereisalsonoprocesstotransfernewissuestoeachother.

85 - ProcessKT 2 Idon’tthinkthatthereareagreementsonwhatwehavetotransfer. Ionlysend knowledge to our shift team; it is not a sharing thing. I don’t sendinformationtootherTT5’ers.

86 - ProcessKT 3 Therearenoagreementsonwhatwehavetotransfer,notthatIamawareof.

87 - ProcessKT 4 Therewereprobablyagreementsmadeatthebeginningoftheproject,butIcannotrecallthem

88 - ProcessKT 5 I’d have to check for agreements on knowledge transfer. I think it issomethinglike“doitwithcommonsense”

89 - ProcessKT 6 DuringtheshifttransferyoutransfertheopenDN.90 - ProcessKT 7 Noagreements.91 - ProcessKT 8 Notherearenoagreementsonwhatorhowwehavetotransferknowledge.92 - ProcessKT 9 I don’t think that there are agreements, during the shift transfer you just

havetotransfertheopenDN’s.93 - ProcessKT 10 Iamnotsureifthereareagreements,butyoujusthavetobeclearinwhat

youtransfer.

68

AppendixE:OneNotefileThisappendixprovidesadetaileddescriptionof theOneNote file that issetuptogetherwiththeTT5engineers.TheOneNotefileconsistsofacompetencepartandageneralTT5part. Inthecompetencepart only the knowledge relevant to that specific competence is shared. In the general TT5 part theknowledgethatcouldbeinterestingformultiplecompetencesorevenfortheentireTT5teamisshared.

Firstofall,knowledgeonDN’siscodifiedinthefile.SincethemainjobofTT5engineersissolvingDN’s,itisimportanttotransferknowledgeaboutthis.OnlythenewDN’s,thustheDN’sthatcannotbefoundin any database, are transferred. However, some engineers stated that it is difficult to determinewhetheraDNtheysolvedisinterestingtosharewiththeircolleaguesandthisresultsinnottransferringanything at all. Based on a proposal from the engineers in the brainstorm session and on the inputduring themeetings, a change in theworkprocess and a request system forDN’s areproposed. Theproposalforthenewworkprocess isthatateachstartoftheshift,theengineercheckstheDN’sthatoccurred during the shifts he or she was absent.When required, additional information is providedbased on what is found out about the DN.When one person request additional information this isdiscussedduringashifttransfer.WhenitisrequestedbymultipleengineersaPowerPointpresentationiscreatedanditislistedfortheTT5meetings.ThiswaytheengineersgetafeelingforwhetheraDNisinterestingorrelevanttoshare,andinthefuturetheycanproactivelystartdoingthis.TheDNrequestsystemispresentedinaflowchartinFigure17.

Figure17:DNrequestsystem

Secondly, knowledge on tooling is provided. There are a lot of different tools and new tools areintroducedeverymonth,howeverthereisnooverviewofthisandnoteverybodyknowshowtousethetooling.Ontopofthat, itsometimesoccursthatsomeoneofashift is illoronvacationandtheothertwoengineersneed to takeover theirworkand thus competence. Since there isnooverarching toolavailableforTT5,theseengineersdonothaveanyinsightintheusedtoolingforthecompetence,hencetheOneNotefilewillimprovethis.

Thirdly, tipsandtricksplayan importantrole intheOneNotefile.Therearea lotofdifferenttipsandtricks regarding troubleshoot work, discovered by the TT5 engineers themselves or shared by VIS,howeverthesearetypicallynotsharedwithothersunlessitisaskedfor.Inthispartthesetipsandtricksaresharedwiththeothers.Thiscaninvolvethingssuchastheinterpretationofresults,workarounds,oroutofspecsituations.

Moreinformationrequested?

SolvedDN

Requested bymorethan1person?

Yes Yes

No No

Donottransferanything

Transfertothepersonduringshifttransfer

CreateaPowerPointwithextrainformation

69

Fourthly, background information on the lithography system is provided. This includes informationabouttests,specifichardware,andtestsequences.Thisisinformationthatisstoredinalotofdifferentlocations, and difficult to find for new engineers. However, it is useful information that will benefittroubleshooting.

Finally,atabfortopicsfortheTT5meetingsiscreated.Engineerscanproposedifferenttopicsthatarevaluableor interesting todiscussduring themeetings that areorganized.Before themeeting the listwithpossibletopicsisreviewedtodeterminewhetherthetopicisstillrelevantandinterestingenoughtodiscuss.

InFigure18anexampleisprovidedoftheOneNotefileforTT5.ThedifferenttabsoftheOneNotefilecanbefoundinthetopofthefile.Thetabscouldalsobesubdividedintosmallersub-tabs.Forexample,DN’scouldbedividedintosimpleDN’sandcomplexDN’s.InFigure18anexampleforthetab“tools”isdepicted.Theengineerscouldmakeuseofastandardtable,whichneedstobefilledoutwhenanewtoolisdiscovered.

Figure18:ExampleoftheOneNotefile

70

AppendixF:ExamplefirstTT5meetingThisappendixprovidesanexampleofthefirstTT5meeting.TheteammeetingsforTT5willoccurtwotofourtimesayear,dependingontheavailabilityoftopics.ThelengthwillbefourhoursandeveryoneofTT5 isexpectedto join.Themeetingsareorganizedand ledbythetestdepartmentteamleadersandthemanagerofthetestdepartment.

Themeetingissplitintotwodifferentparts.ThefirsttwohoursofthemeetingareheldwiththeentireTT5team,theremainingtwohourswiththecompetenceteams.

ExampleagendafirstmeetingAsstatedabove,themeetingissplitintotwoparts,ageneralTT5meetingandacompetencemeeting.Anexampleagendaforthefirstmeetingispresented:

GeneralTT5meeting

- Introduction 5minutes

- Recaplastmeeting 5minutes

- TT5Goals

o Listofgoals&explanation 10minutes

o Brainstormonhowtoachievethosegoals 40minutes

o Presentingtheresultsofthebrainstorm 15minutes

o Discussion&summaryinformofapracticalactionlist 15minutes

- EvaluationKnowledgeTransfer

o Experiencesofar&improvementpoints 20minutes

o Finalconclusionsandnextsteps 10minutes

Competencemeeting

- IssueResolution

o Approach 30minutes

o Seensofar 30minutes

- CompetencetopicsbasedoninputOneNote 60minutes

AfterthemeetingitisadvisedtoorganizeateambuildingactivityordrinkswiththeentireTT5team.