AI帮你理解科学

AI 生成解读视频

AI抽取解析论文重点内容自动生成视频


pub
生成解读视频

AI 溯源

AI解析本论文相关学术脉络


Master Reading Tree
生成 溯源树

AI 精读

AI抽取本论文的概要总结


微博一下
This research contributes to that foundation by formally advancing a generic, descriptive ontology that forms a cradle for knowledge management research, study, and practice

A formal knowledge management ontology: Conduct, activities, resources, and influences

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, no. 7 (2004): 593-612

引用295|浏览23
下载 PDF 全文
引用
微博一下

摘要

This article describes a collaboratively engineered general-purpose knowledge management (KM) ontology that can be used by practitioners, researchers, and educators. The ontology is formally characterized in terms of nearly one hundred definitions and axioms that evolved from a Delphi-like process involving a diverse panel of over 30 KM p...更多

代码

数据

0
简介
  • Ontologies provide a simplified and explicit specification of a phenomenon that the authors desire to represent (Gruber, 1995).
  • The KM field has received considerable attention from researchers and practitioners
  • Despite this attention and consequent progress, KM researchers have not provided a well-integrated framework to the community that would help unify this discipline.
  • This sentiment is appropriately summarized by Spender (2003) when he states, “But as we look at the KM literature it is immediately clear that it is neither homogeneous nor well integrated.
  • There is no single set of terms or even theoretical constructs. . . .” In order to facilitate maturation and progress of KM as a credible research discipline, the field needs a formal ontology that offers a comprehensive understanding of KM phenomena, and operates as an organizer for past research and a generative mechanism for future research directions
重点内容
  • Ontologies provide a simplified and explicit specification of a phenomenon that we desire to represent (Gruber, 1995)
  • As a step in this direction, we introduce a formal characterization of a knowledge management ontology collaboratively developed with an international panel of knowledge management practitioners and researchers
  • It is crucial to lay a strong foundation on which future knowledge management research, practice, and education can develop
  • This research contributes to that foundation by formally advancing a generic, descriptive ontology that forms a cradle for knowledge management research, study, and practice
  • The ontology identifies and relates knowledge manipulation activities that operate on those resources
  • It recognizes factors that influence the conduct of knowledge management in an organization
方法
  • Developed methods for accessing knowledge assets
  • An exploratory matrix, such as the one shown in Table 2, can be further developed by selecting one issue and examining it in greater depth using more detailed ontology elements.
  • The ontology provides a common vocabulary and frame of reference that can enhance the communication and sharing of ideas among practitioners.
  • It provides a checklist of considerations to ponder in the course of planning and conducting KM initiatives.
  • Notice that the mode is “very helpful,” and more than three fourths think the ontology is at least moderately helpful to practitioners
结果
  • At about 30%, the mode of ontology utility for practitioners is “very helpful” and more than 70% of panelists indicate that the ontology is at least “moderately helpful” for practitioners.
结论
  • It is crucial to lay a strong foundation on which future KM research, practice, and education can develop.
  • This research contributes to that foundation by formally advancing a generic, descriptive ontology that forms a cradle for KM research, study, and practice.
  • The collaboratively developed ontology identifies and characterizes major elements of KM in a unified, relatively comprehensive manner.
  • It describes organizational KRs where knowledge may be stored, embedded, and/or represented.
  • It recognizes factors that influence the conduct of KM in an organization
表格
  • Table1: The ontology’s knowledge manipulation activity component
  • Table2: Some topics implied for a sample of KM issues
  • Table3: Examples of ethical issues suggested by the KM ontology
  • Table4: A sample CKO checklist for KM initiatives
  • Table5: Applying the KM ontology to summarize exemplars of KM best practices
  • Table6: Examples of knowledge management technologies
  • Table7: Examples of candidate technologies that support aspects of KM
Download tables as Excel
基金
  • This research was supported in part by the Kentucky Initiative for Knowledge Management, established in 1988 at the University of Kentucky
引用论文
  • Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. (2001). Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 107–136.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Amidon, D., & Macnamara, D. (2003). The 7 C’s of knowledge leadership: Innovating our future. In C. Holsapple (Ed.), Handbook on knowledge management— knowledge matters (pp. 539 –552). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Bacon, J., & Fitzgerald, B. (1996). The field of IST: A name, a framework and a central focus. Executive Systems Research Center Working Paper Series, 96(5), 1–35.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Bennet, A., & Neilsen, R. (2003). The leaders of knowledge initiatives: Qualifications, roles, and responsibilities. In C. Holsapple (Ed.), Handbook on knowledge management— knowledge matters (pp. 523–538). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Drucker, P. (1993). Post-capitalist society. New York: HarperCollins.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Gruber, T.R.. (1995). Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing. International Journal of Human and Computer Studies, 43(5/6), 907–928.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Hanley, S., & Malafsky, G. (2003). A guide for measuring the value of KM investments. In C. Holsapple (Ed.), Handbook on knowledge management— knowledge directions (pp. 369 –390). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Holsapple, C. (1995). Knowledge management in decision making and decision support. Knowledge and Policy, 8(1), 5–22.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Holsapple, C. (2003a). Knowledge and its attributes. In C. Holsapple (Ed.), Handbook on knowledge management— knowledge matters (pp. 165– 188). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Holsapple, C. (Ed.). (2003b). Handbook on knowledge management— knowledge matters. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Holsapple, C. (Ed.). (2003c). Handbook on knowledge management— knowledge directions. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Holsapple, C., Johnson, L., & Waldron, V. (1996). A formal model for the study of communication support systems. Human Communication Research, 22(3), 421– 446.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Holsapple, C.W., & Jones, K. (2003). Toward an elaboration of the knowledge chain model. Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information Systems, Tampa, FL, August 4 –5.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Holsapple, C.W., & Joshi, K.D. (2000). An investigation of factors that influence the management of knowledge in organizations. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9(2–3), 235–261.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Holsapple, C.W., & Joshi, K.D. (2001). Organizational knowledge resources. Decision Support Systems, 31(4), 39 –54.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Holsapple, C.W., & Joshi, K.D. (2002a). A collaborative approach to ontology design. Communications of the ACM, 44(2), 42– 47.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Holsapple, C.W., & Joshi, K.D. (2002b). The evolution of knowledge management frameworks. In S. Barnes (Ed.), Knowledge management systems: Theory and practice (pp. 222–242). London: International Thomson Business Press.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Holsapple, C.W., & Joshi, K.D. (2002c). Knowledge manipulation activities: Results of a Delphi study. Information and Management, 39(6), 477– 490.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Holsapple, C., & Luo, W. (1996). A framework for studying computer support of organizational infrastructure. Information and Management, 31(1), 13–24.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Holsapple, C., & Singh, M. (2000). The knowledge chain. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Southern Association on Information Systems, Atlanta, GA, March 31–April 2.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Holsapple, C., & Singh, M. (2001). The knowledge chain model: Activities for competitiveness. Expert Systems with Applications, 20(1), 77–98.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Holsapple, C., & Whinston, A. (1996). Decision support systems: A knowledge-based approach. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Jamieson, R., & Handzic, M. (2003). A framework for security, control, and assurance of knowledge management systems. In C. Holsapple (Ed.), Handbook on knowledge management— knowledge matters (pp. 477–506). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Malone, T., & Crowston, K. (1994). The interdisciplinary study of coordination. ACM Computing Surveys, 26(1), 87–119.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Marshall, N., & Brady, T. (2001). Knowledge management and the politics of knowledge: Illustrations from complex products and systems. European Journal of Information Systems, 10(2), 99 –112.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Massey, A.P., Montoya-Weiss, M.M., & O’Driscoll, T.M. (2002). Knowledge management in pursuit of performance: Insights from Nortel Networks. MIS Quarterly, 26(3), 269 –289.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Newell, A. (1982). The knowledge level. Artificial Intelligence, 18(1), 87–127.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14 –37.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Randall, D., Hughes, J., O’Brien, J., Rouncefield, M., & Tolmie, P. (2001). Memories are made of this: Explicating organisational knowledge and memory. European Journal of Information Systems, 10(2), 113–121.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Ruth, S., Shaw, N., & Frizell, V. (2003). Knowledge management education: An overview of programs and instruction. In C. Holsapple (Ed.), Handbook on knowledge management— knowledge directions (pp. 581– 604). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Schein, E. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership. Washington, DC: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Singh, M. (2000). Toward a knowledge management view of electronic business: Introduction and investigation of the knowledge chain model for competitive advantage. Doctoral dissertation, University of Kentucky, Lexington.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Spender, J.-C. (2003). Knowledge fields: Some post 9/11 thoughts about the knowledge-based theory of firm. In C. Holsapple (Ed.), Handbook on knowledge management— knowledge matters (pp. 59 –71). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Stone, D., & Warsono, S. (2003). Does accounting account for knowledge? In C. Holsapple (Ed.), Handbook on knowledge management— knowledge matters (pp. 253–270). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Sutton, D.C. (2001). What is knowledge and can it be managed? European Journal of Information Systems, 10(2), 80 – 88.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Weidner, D. (2003). In thought & practice [Book review; online]. Retrieved October 1, 2003, from http://www.kmpro.org/journal/Book_ Review/Handbook_on_Knowledge_Management.cfm
    Findings
  • 612 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY—May 2004
    Google ScholarFindings
0
您的评分 :

暂无评分

标签
评论
数据免责声明
页面数据均来自互联网公开来源、合作出版商和通过AI技术自动分析结果,我们不对页面数据的有效性、准确性、正确性、可靠性、完整性和及时性做出任何承诺和保证。若有疑问,可以通过电子邮件方式联系我们:report@aminer.cn