1. Trang chủ
  2. » Kinh Doanh - Tiếp Thị

The New Edge in Knowledge: How Knowledge Management Is Changing the Way We Do Business by Carla O''''Dell and Cindy Hubert_9 pdf

25 342 0
Tài liệu được quét OCR, nội dung có thể không chính xác

Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)

Tài liệu hạn chế xem trước, để xem đầy đủ mời bạn chọn Tải xuống

THÔNG TIN TÀI LIỆU

Thông tin cơ bản

Tiêu đề The New Edge in Knowledge: How Knowledge Management Is Changing the Way We Do Business
Tác giả Carla O'Dell, Cindy Hubert
Trường học Idea Group Inc.
Thể loại Essay
Năm xuất bản 2004
Thành phố Hershey
Định dạng
Số trang 25
Dung lượng 296,26 KB

Các công cụ chuyển đổi và chỉnh sửa cho tài liệu này

Nội dung

Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc... On the other hand, for a portal product to improve its support for knowledge manageme

Trang 1

to the popular presence of simple personalization and text support in the portal products On the other hand, presentation process was lacking in advanced personalization, intuitive search results and multtmedia content Out of the 58 portal products reviewed, only Datachannel server, HummingBird GIP and Intraspect were able to achieve a maximum score of 5

The study showed a mean score of 2.47 for the search process Although search or retrieval could be done across different knowledge domains, portal products were weak in an intelligent push technology, fuzzy search, and knowledge mining and did not allow the storage of search results for reuse or sharing Nevertheless, many products were able to incorporate all the five components, and they were Brio Portal, Comintell Knowledge XChanger, Convera Retrievalware, Eoexchange UniversalSearch, HummingBird EIP, Verity PortalOne and Autonomy-in-a-box The store process obtained the third highest mean score of 2.13 The most common component was the ability

to link information sources Components that were less common were multi- dimensional cataloguing/indexing, subject experts’ directory, knowledge bases and filtering iPlanet Portal Server, Orbital Organik and Plumtree Corporate Portal were the only products out of the 58 products included in the sample that could achieve the maximum score of 5 for this process

Overall, the classify process could only obtain alow mean score ot2.1 Except for push technology, components such as customized publishing tools, mforma- tion refinery tools, discussion groups and metadata were consistently lacking in the portal product samples Individual products such as Brio Portal, Comintell Knowledge XChanger and Autonomy-in-a-box have managed to achteve the maximum score of 5 Four of the processes, namely share, capture, maintain and generate processes, had an unexpected low mean score of less than 2 This means that each of them has less than 2 out of the 5 possible components

Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc is prohibited.

Trang 2

The mean score for share process was 1.79 and the push-publishing-nottfica- tion component was more common than online collaboration, group decisions, multimedia support, groupware and video-conferencing Thus, knowledge sharing was notas easily implemented by using a portal product as previously claimed by vendors Of the sample, HummuingBird EJP and Intraspect Portals were the only products that scored 5 (the maximum score)

It was found that the capture process achieved a low mean score of 1.36 This process was particularly weak in tracking personal navigational trail, user audit trailand employee skills yellow pages Out of 58 portal products, none of them was able to achieve ascore of 4 or 5 This finding indicated the failure of portals

to capture knowledge and to enable them for reuse by other knowledge

workers

Equally neglected was the maintain process, with a mean score of 1.34 Most

of the portal products allowed the knowledge source to be manually validated but did not provide project databases, customer support databases, automatic validation and communities of practice Lotus K station and Intraspect were the only products with the maximum individual score of 5

The generate process obtained the lowest mean score of 0.8 L This inferred the inability of portals to externalize knowledge, mine data and to incorporate conceptual mapping and pattern recognition However, out of 58 portal products, only Brio Portail was able to achieve the maximum score of 5 Insummary, only four out of nine portal infrastructure services and one out of eight processes were well supported by enterprise portals Therefore, there exist large gaps between what the vendors claimed that their portal products could do and what these products can actually contribute in any Knowledge management initiative lf enterprise portals were seen as a form of technology, then portals alone were not able to meet all the criteria of a knowledge management system On the other hand, for a portal product to improve its support for knowledge management, it must also improve in the services and processes that itis weak in

There were many reasons why certain services or processes were deficient in portal products One possible reason was that vendors might not haveafull understanding of knowledge management With insufficient knowledge ora wrong perception, vendors who were not ready continued to penetrate the portal market and positioned themselves as the pioneer of enterprise portals

As each vendor has his or her own interpretation of knowledge management, naturally the vendors’ products were aligned towards those features consid-

Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc Copyme or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc is prohibited.

Trang 3

192 Chaudhry

ered as essential for knowledge management As aconsequence, services or processes that portal products were found lacking might actually be considered

as non-essential items by the vendors

Yet another possible reason was that portal vendors might have originated from

a specialized area before they started producing portal products Forexample, Cognos, Convera and Documentum were originally vendors specializing in business intelligence, search engine and content management, respectively Thus, apart from the original area of specialization, other features were not as well developed in their portal product Moreover, the R&D department of portal vendors might not have all the necessary expertise and resources to conduct research in all aspects of enterprise portals Forexample, many R&D staff knew the details of personalization service, as it was common in Internet portals such as My Yahoo, but they did not understand the details of business intelligence service, as this was a very specialized field Besides, developers might be constrained by the time and budget allocated for the development of the product Their scope in the development of portal features could also be attributed to the product’s selling price that was pegged at a lower level than competing products As aresult, not all portal features were developed up to

a standard necessary to support knowledge management

Summary and Conclusion

This study found that enterprise portals were well equipped with personaliza- tion service, content management service, folder sharing service and search or retrieval services Technically, enterprise portals must improve on other services such as categorization, workflow, document management, collabora- tion and business intelligence in order to better support knowledge manage- ment They should handle contextual media such as images, audio and video files, incorporate an accurate metadata or taxonomy system, allow business processes to be mapped to a workflow and offer informative mining of structured and unstructured information

Where the knowledge management cycle was concerned, using enterprise portal technology was not sufficient to support all processes From the results,

it was inferred that enterprise portals were excellent in supporting the presen- tation process but weak in supporting the retrieval, storage, classification, sharing, capture, maintenance and generation processes In order for enter-

Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc is prohibited.

Trang 4

prise portals to strengthen their support for knowledge management, the portal products could improve in the deficient area by being extensible or combine with other products

One inference from this study was that most enterprise portals offered personalization service and this will most likely be the single service thatcan heip bridge the gaps and improve on support for knowledge management Extensible Web parts already existed for a number of products such as Broadvision’s Portlets, Brio’s SmartObjects, Citrix’s Content Delivery Agent, Cognos’s Gadgets, DataChannel’s Portlets, Plimtree’s Gadgets, PeopleSoft’ s Pagelets and HummingBird’s eClips As there were many third-party compa- nies who coulddevelop Web parts for a small fee or make them available as free downloads, these portal products can incorporate almost any objects in their portals’ interface For example, ifthe portal product was weak in business intelligence service and generate process, one can develop and insert a specific Web part to provide data mining, data extraction and transformation so that Knowledge can be discovered from meaningless information Thus, it would be important for enterprise portals to include extensible Web parts in their mission

to be aknowledge management tool

Another deduction was that other technologies should be combined with portal products to support knowledge management processes For example, if a portal product needs improvement in categorization service and classify process, it should be integrated with Inxight’s Categorizer or Semio’s Tax- onomy, which are specialized products in such areas By identifying the weakness of an enterprise portal, one can mix-and-match with the right technology to nprove the infrastructure for knowledge management

Although enterprise portals were lacking in certain areas and cannot be guaranteed to be acomplete knowledge management solution, they remain the most promising technology to serve as the infrastructure to accommodate the broad and extensive processes within the knowledge management life cycle

References

Barnick, D., Smith, D., & Phifer, G (1999, September 27) Q&A: Trends in Internet and enterprise portals GartnerGroup RAS Services No QA- 09-0602

Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc Copyme or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc is prohibited.

Trang 5

Butler Group (2001) Corporate portals: Survey analysis USA: The Butler Group

Chaudury, A.S.(1997) How to evaluate a library automation system Singapore Libraries, 26(2), 3 - 16

CIO (1999, September 15) Knowledge management: Big challenges, big rewards CiO special advertising supplement Available: http:// www.cio.com/sponsors/09 1599 _ km_I.htol

Computer Associates (2000) Knowledge portals: Integrating Web sites without going insane Paper presented at CA- World 2000 Available: hitp://www.caworld.cpm/proceedings/2000/general/ep 102 pn/ [200 1, Oct 1]

Davydov, M.M (2001) Cerporate portals and e-business integration USA: McGraw-Hill

Delphi Group (1997) Delphi on knowledge management: Research and perspectives on today’s knowledge landscape Boston: The Delphi Group

Delphi Group 2001, April) Application portals: Maximising existing computing resources in a changing business and technology environ- ment Boston: The Delphi Group

Deveau, D 2002) No brain, no gain Computing Canada, 28(10), 14-15 Frappaolo, C., & Toms, W (1997) Knowledge management: Prom terra incognita to terra firma In J.W Cortada & J.A Woods (Eds.), The knowledge management yearbook 1999-2000 (pp 381-388) Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann

Harris, K., Phiter, G., & Hayward, S (1999, August 2) The enterprise portal: Is it knowledge management? GartnerGroup RAS Services

Trang 6

Jackson, C (199%) Process to product: Creating tools for knowledge management The BizTech Network Available: http://www.brint.com/ members/online/120205/jackson/secn | htm

Kotorov, R., & Hsu, E (2001) A model for enterprise portal management Journal of Knowledge Management, 5(1), 86 - 93

Kounadis, T (2000, August) How to pick the best portal? E-business Advisor Available: http://www.advisor.com/Articles.nsf/aid/KOUNTOL Kozlowski, M.A (1999) New Delphi methodology facilitates organizational success with corporate portals The Delphi Group Available: http:// www.delphigroup.com/pressreleases/1999-PR/I9990615- PortalDesignMethod him

Merlyn, P.R (1998, December) From information technology to knowledge technology Journal of Knowledge Management, 2(2), 28-35

Michaluk, D 2000) Enterprise information portals comparison & selec- tion guide Faulkner Information Services Docid GOO17648

Natarajan, G., & Shekhar, S (2000) Knowledge management: Enabling business growth New Dethi: Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Nesbitt, K (2001) The evolution of knowledge management Faulkner Information Services Docid 00017607

Phifer, G (1999, April 20) Enterprise portal trends emerge among confusion, GartnerGroup RAS Services No SPA-07-6037

Phifer, G (2000, April 19) C?O@ Alert: Be prepared to support multiple portals in your enterprise GartnerGroup RAS Services No IGG- 04192000-02

Phifer, G (2000, August 2) ClO Alert: Best practises in deploying enter- prise portals GartnerGroup RAS Services No [GG-08022000-0 1 Ruber, P 2000, April) Portals ona mission Knowledge Management, 35-

Tiwana, A (2000) The knowledge management toolkit: Practical tech- niques for building a knowledge management system Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall

Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc Copyme or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc is prohibited.

Trang 7

196 Chaudhry

Valente, A., & Housel, T (2001) Electronic tools for knowledge manage- ment In H Bell (Ed.), Measuring and managing knowledge (pp 109

- 125) Boston: McGraw Hull

White, M (2000) Enterprise information portals The Electronic Library, 18(3), 354-362

Widmayer, K (2000, December 5) Enterprise information portals and knowledge management Paper presented at the International Knowl- edge Management meeting

Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc is prohibited.

Trang 8

Appendix A

Checklist for Assessing Portal Products

Portal Infrastructure Services

Color and layout Notification using push and pull technology

Dynamic based on user activity

Extensible Web parts

lạ

Simple search, e.g., keywords

Advanced options pattern matching or concept-based Ability to search across all data sources

Automatic searching while performing other task Storing search results for sharing and reference

Business Intelligence Q Mining of structured data

Q Mining of unstructured data

Document Management | ca Version control

a Document history, file tracking or audit and control access

u_ Indexing of scanned images

u Metadata tag to contents

Control access Folder in physical drive Folder in central database Structured data

Trang 9

Presentation Simple personalization, e.g., limited layout

Advanced personalization, e.g., library for Web components

Intuitive search result presentation Text support

Multiple knowledge domains Summary of results

Capture

Manual validation Automatic validation

Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc is prohibited.

Trang 10

Hyperwave

IBM iManage Infolmage Insight Technologies

Intervate Interwoven

iPlanet Knowledge-Track

Lotus

Mediapps Microsoft Net Objects Onyx Open Text Livelink Oracle

Orbital PeopleSoft Plumtree Sagent Technology SAP

Sybase Tibco Verity Viador Webridge Zap Ucone

Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc Copyme or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc is prohibited.

Trang 11

200 Lee & Lee

Abstract

This chapter introduces ontology conceptual modeling for discovering Bluetooth Services in m-commerce Discovery services in a dynamic environment, such as Bluetooth, can be a challenge because Bluetooth is unlike any wired network, as there is no need to physically attach cables

to the devices you are communicating with Regular Bluetooth service

attributes To support the matching mechanism and allow more organized service discovery, service relation ontology is proposed to extend and

Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc is prohibited.

Trang 12

enhance the hierarchical structure introduced in the Bluetooth specification Frame-based and XML-based approaches are used to codify the service relation ontology, which represents the relations of service concepts A semantic matching process is introduced to facilitate inexact matching, which leads to a situation in which a simple positive or negative response can be meaningful The Bluetooth ontology modeling represents a broad range of service descriptions and information The semantic matching process improves the quality of service discovery We believe that Bluetooth wireless networks’ amalgamation with the ontology conceptual modeling paradigm is a necessary component of creating a new path in the field of m-commerce infrastructures

Introduction

Bluetooth™ is set to be the fastest growing technology since the Internet or the cellular phone (Bray & Stuman, 2002) Bluetooth has created the notion of a Personal Area Network (PAN), a close range wireless network set to revolutionize the way people interact with the information and technology around them Bluetooth is unlike any wired network, as there is no need to physically attach a cable to the devices you are communicating with In other words, you may not know exactly what devices you are talking to and what their capabilities are To cope with this, Bluetooth provides inquiry and paging mechanisms and a Service Discovery Protocol (SDP) Service discovery, normally, involves achent, service provider, and seek out or directory server Bluetooth does not define a human-machine interface for service discovery; it only defines the protocol to exchange data between a server offering services and aclent wishing to use them The SDP in Bluetooth provides a means for applications to discover which services are available and to determine the characteristics of those available services (Bluetooth Specification, 2001) However, service discovery in the Bluetooth environment tis different from service discovery protocol in traditional network environments Inthe Bluetooth environment, the set of services that are available changes dynamically based

on the RF proximity of the device in motion

The Bluetooth SDP uses 128-bit university unique identifiers (UUIDs) that are associated with every service and attributes of that service However, UUID- based description and matching of services are often inadequate (Avancha,

Copyright © 2004, Idea Group Inc Copyme or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc is prohibited.

Ngày đăng: 21/06/2014, 08:20

TÀI LIỆU CÙNG NGƯỜI DÙNG

TÀI LIỆU LIÊN QUAN

🧩 Sản phẩm bạn có thể quan tâm