Taxonomies and Knowledge Management #taxonomy
|
Patrick Lambe
Hi folks
I'm scheduled to give the SIKM Leader's presentation in September, and have been mulling over with Stan and Andrew Gent what a suitable topic might be. I'd like to find out what topic might be of most practical interest to you. I have just published a book on the role of taxonomy work in KM (www.organisingknowledge.com) and was therefore proposing something in that domain. Andrew suggested something along the lines of how taxonomies can co-evolve with shifting knowledge domains (ie taxonomies and change), and that's an area that I'd certainly find interesting to cover. Are there other pressing issues around the organisation of knowledge, taxonomy work, and organisation effectiveness that you would find it useful to focus on? Best Patrick |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mark D Neff <mneff@...>
Patrick, Great topic. Then after you conclude the general discussion, I would like to see a focused discussion on application. For example, I would love to see what everyone thinks a KM taxonomy looks like today. I am sure it contains a number of terms that it did not used to contain. As KM merges with collaboration, what additional terms should be considered part of or adjunct to a KM taxonomy? How does this link in to innovation, business performance, strategy, people development, learning, ... There are so many ways this can go and a taxonomy may help us to explore the fringes as well as give us new areas to consider. Mark Neff (706) 447-8522 4350 Azalea Drive Evans, GA 30809 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is a PRIVATE message. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete without copying and kindly advise us by e-mail of the mistake in delivery. NOTE: Regardless of content, this e-mail shall not operate to bind CSC to any order or other contract unless pursuant to explicit written agreement or government initiative expressly permitting the use of e-mail for such purpose. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi folks I'm scheduled to give the SIKM Leader's presentation in September, and have been mulling over with Stan and Andrew Gent what a suitable topic might be. I'd like to find out what topic might be of most practical interest to you. I have just published a book on the role of taxonomy work in KM (www.organisingknowledge.com) and was therefore proposing something in that domain. Andrew suggested something along the lines of how taxonomies can co-evolve with shifting knowledge domains (ie taxonomies and change), and that's an area that I'd certainly find interesting to cover. Are there other pressing issues around the organisation of knowledge, taxonomy work, and organisation effectiveness that you would find it useful to focus on? Best Patrick Patrick Lambe website: www.straits! knowledg e.com weblog: www.greenchameleon.com book: www.organisingknowledge.com |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
stberzins <steven.berzins@...>
Hi Patrick - that sounds very interesting to me. Also, any
discussion about the structured taxonomy versus folksonomy is also fun to hear. Thanks Steve --- In sikmleaders@..., Patrick Lambe <plambe@...> wrote: September, and have been mulling over with Stan and Andrew Gent what asuitable topic might be. I'd like to find out what topic might be of mostrole of taxonomy work in KM (www.organisingknowledge.com) and wasan area that I'd certainly find interesting to cover. Are thereother pressing issues around the organisation of knowledge, taxonomywork, and organisation effectiveness that you would find it useful tofocus on? |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
steven.wieneke@...
Patrick, Yes a discussion on KM Taxonomy would be of interest to us as well. Especially since we will be presenting "The KM Domain" which is the beginning of a KM taxonomy for the May SIKMLeader presentation. The added dimension to the KM Domain (taxonomy) is a "maturity" continuum. Regards, Steven Wieneke GM Technical Fellow Global Engineering General Motors Corporation steven.wieneke@...
Patrick, Great topic. Then after you conclude the general discussion, I would like to see a focused discussion on application. For example, I would love to see what everyone thinks a KM taxonomy looks like today. I am sure it contains a number of terms that it did not used to contain. As KM merges with collaboration, what additional terms should be considered part of or adjunct to a KM taxonomy? How does this link in to innovation, business performance, strategy, people development, learning, ... There are so many ways this can go and a taxonomy may help us to explore the fringes as well as give us new areas to consider. Mark Neff (706) 447-8522 4350 Azalea Drive Evans, GA 30809 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is a PRIVATE message. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete without copying and kindly advise us by e-mail of the mistake in delivery. NOTE: Regardless of content, this e-mail shall not operate to bind CSC to any order or other contract unless pursuant to explicit written agreement or government initiative expressly permitting the use of e-mail for such purpose. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi folks I'm scheduled to give the SIKM Leader's presentation in September, and have been mulling over with Stan and Andrew Gent what a suitable topic might be. I'd like to find out what topic might be of most practical interest to you. I have just published a book on the role of taxonomy work in KM (www.organisingknowledge.com) and was therefore proposing something in that domain. Andrew suggested something along the lines of how taxonomies can co-evolve with shifting knowledge domains (ie taxonomies and change), and that's an area that I'd certainly find interesting to cover. Are there other pressing issues around the organisation of knowledge, taxonomy work, and organisation effectiveness that you would find it useful to focus on? Best Patrick Patrick Lambe website: www.straits! knowledg e.com weblog: www.greenchameleon.com book: www.organisingknowledge.com
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Tom Short <tom.short@...>
Patrick - taxonomies is a topic I've been thinking about lately -
keeps coming up as I work with various groups here. One group is trying to centralize the procedural notes, engineering emails, and dozens of other documents in each of its 31 separate locations, by digitizing the paper items, and then dumping them onto a server disk drive along with the already-digitally-stored items. The resulting trove of a few thousand documents will then need to be organized - but how?? I like the idea of a folksonomy for generating metatags (in the cases where the docs are scanned and not OCR'd). How would you handle that problem using taxonomic principles? The other one is related to developing technical skill/competency profiles. Would be great to have these for about half of our company's employees (the other roughly half of our employees who are in union positions have fairly standard job profiles already). How do we create the skills terms in a way that is meaningful at the individual job level, yet somewhat standardized soas to be searchable, and avoiding the "I say tomato, you say tamahto" problem? These two are of interest to me, as well as any other practical applications of taxonomies you have come across - taxonomy is certainly a relevant topic to our field, conceptually. Where it gets really interesting to me is seeing how it is applied to successfully address real business problems. Thanks! -Tom --- In sikmleaders@..., Patrick Lambe <plambe@...> wrote: September, and have been mulling over with Stan and Andrew Gent what asuitable topic might be. I'd like to find out what topic might be of mostrole of taxonomy work in KM (www.organisingknowledge.com) and wasan area that I'd certainly find interesting to cover. Are thereother pressing issues around the organisation of knowledge, taxonomywork, and organisation effectiveness that you would find it useful tofocus on? |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Pugh, Katrina B <katrina.b.pugh@...>
Hi, Tom et al –
The taxonomy question is a big one for us right now at Intel Solution Services, as we move off of an older repository onto Sharepoint 2007. We’ll be consolidating broadly-used knowledge into a central “KnoweldgeCenter,” but will have to also manage local collaboration-libraries. In effect, we’ll have taxonomies with a capital “T” (central) and taxonomies with a little “t” (local) which we’ll need to keep in sync – at least enough so that it facilitates the publishing from local to the KnowledgeCenter as the content is chosen for sharing.
Meanwhile, we have a program to generate common competency definitions (as you put it the “I say tomato” problem), for people to assess their competency levels, and for there to be search across regions, product/solution areas, etc. This repository has been a big effort for our Capability Development Team, and it is starting to bear fruit. The challenge will be, with Sharepoint 2007, to integrate this repository with the Personal portals. The “I say tomato” problem may come up again as the competency concepts morph in that less-structured realm. I’d be keen on hearing people’s ideas on this.
Cheers Kate
Katrina B. Pugh Worldwide Knowledge Management Consultant Business Strategy and Knowledge Integration Intel® Solution Services Telephone: 781 538 5262 Mobile: 617-967-3910 E-mail: mailto:katrina.b.pugh@... URL: http://www.intel.com/go/intelsolutionservices
From:
sikmleaders@... [mailto:sikmleaders@...] On Behalf Of Tom Short
Patrick - taxonomies is a topic I've been thinking
about lately - |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Patrick Lambe
Thanks for the swift responses folks. If I hear right, we have three areas of interest:
"Longitudinal" taxonomies where the knowledge domain shifts with time, maybe a link to folksonomies Taxonomies to cover the domain of knowledge management The issue of representing different worldviews - eg core taxonomy and "satellite" taxonomies All meaty stuff! Still willing to hear from others, if I don't respond quickly, it;s because I'll be travelling a lot over the next ten days. Many thanks Patrick |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Bruce Karney <bkarney@...>
Tom Short wrote:
"The other one is related to developing technical skill/competency profiles. Would be great to have these for about half of our company's employees (the other roughly half of our employees who are in union positions have fairly standard job profiles already). How do we create the skills terms in a way that is meaningful at the individual job level, yet somewhat standardized so as to be searchable and avoiding the "I say tomato, you say tamahto" problem?" The non-jargon term for this is "resume." Outplacement firms and career counsellors specialize in helping people re-write their resumes so that they contain the terms that match what employers are currently seeking. The process generally starts by looking at the job descriptions that employers use when trying to find new employees and then making sure that candidates' resumes include the key words and phrases that will make a search tool's robotic little eyes light up. Resumes also provide context that is far more useful to understanding the candidate's abilities than a database containing a very long list of skills and abilities and some sort of H/M/L tag to indicate "how much" of each skill a person has. By helping your employees write better resumes, and then getting those documents entered into PG&Es internal systems, you will be clearly offering "something for them" and, at the same time, getting something useful for PG&E. Internal resume banks can also be seen as a replacement for Learning Management Systems which record a history of training events attended. Few training events, sad to say, have had enough impact on my capabilities to deserve inclusion in my resume, and I imagine that is true for most people. I personally consider LMS to be a real boondoggle -- except when legal compliance issues are involved -- though I don't believe this view is widely shared yet in the corporate HR or training communities. Cheers, Bruce KM-Experts.com |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
tombarfield75 <thomas.m.barfield@...>
A smattering of thoughts:
- I think we have done a good job at effectively and efficiently managing our taxonomy. Our taxonomy is approximately 3 years old and we have managed to keep it close to its original size. - We have extended the use of our taxonomy into the training and experts space. In the training space this allows us to display KM topics within our learning management system on related courses. - While we haven't pushed it to date, expert tagging using the taxonomy has been limited. - Our taxonomy drives our navigation on our knowledge system. We are finding that most of our users are not using the navigation and drilling thru the taxonomy. Rather they are diving into the middle of our site and navigating thru links on those pages. The net effect is that I think most of our users are easily getting lost as they move thru our site - on each page having to digest a wealth of information. Our taxonomy was intended to narrow the users experience as they navigate - unfortunately this has not worked out - possibly due to our interface. - Our taxonomy was also intended to help improve search quality. I don't know how much this has happened because I don't think users use search terms that frequently match the taxonomy. I think this may be further limited as we move to Sharepoint 2007 because the new search engine recommends against relevancy weighting elements of the taxonomy over other elements. - We have considered for years merging the KM taxonomy with the skills taxonomy used by recruiting and scheduling. We may make some progress on this over the next year. - From an implementation perspective we are considering a potential innovative simply approach to managing the taxonomy with Sharepoint 2007. With Sharepoint 2007, Microsoft has added the ability to tag list and document library folders with meta-data (keyword owner, link to page...). We are considering using this a folder structure to store the entire taxonomy. I am open to discussing these ideas - sounds like there may be some synergies amoungst some of us. Tom |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|