Search (18 results, page 1 of 1)

0.060990475 = product of:
  0.12198095 = sum of:
    0.068930924 = weight(_text_:digital in 1502) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.068930924 = score(doc=1502,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.34865242 = fieldWeight in 1502, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1502)
    0.05305003 = weight(_text_:library in 1502) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05305003 = score(doc=1502,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.40253976 = fieldWeight in 1502, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1502)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Briefly describes the information products and services, the related databases, development of digital library and web-resources and web-based services, vocabulary control tools, networking, and other projects of the Library of the National Tuberculosis Institute (NTI), Bangalore. Acknowledges the involvement of and advice and assistance provided by Prof. A. Neelameghan to these programmes and projects.

0.017523441 = product of:
  0.035046883 = sum of:
    0.015314223 = weight(_text_:library in 4246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015314223 = score(doc=4246,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.11620321 = fieldWeight in 4246, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4246)
    0.019732658 = product of:
      0.039465316 = sum of:
        0.039465316 = weight(_text_:project in 4246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039465316 = score(doc=4246,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.18654276 = fieldWeight in 4246, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4246)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The Intranet has been hailed as the solution to organizational technology issues as far reaching as faster information systems development, access to legacy system data, integration of incompatible systems, and progress toward the "paperless office." Moreover, intranets enable work-flow management and project management and are a platform for process redesign. Yet possibly the most far-reaching impact of the Intranet is an organizational knowledge. Intranets are providing institutions and organizations with opportunities to create knowledge. A large proportion of the pioneers are high-technology companies making use of intranets for knowledge-intensive new product development. Intranets enable community expertise to develop, as engineers brainstorm and give each other feedback in discussion groups and share product specifications and product test result queries. The scope of interest in intranets is evidenced by diverse articles and applications in the medical, legal, engineering, training, travel, technical, computer-related, and manufacturing industries. Although some definitions restrict intranets to internal information an internal webs accessed exclusively by internal users, in this article, we adopt a broader definition that includes customers and suppliers in the extended enterprise [also called an "Extranet"] and industrywide applications. Thus, an intranet is a "powerful tool for institution-wide communications, collaborative projects, and the establishment of a sense of community an a manageable scale". Despite the fact that many organizations have adopted the Intranet with great enthusiasm and there has been an avalanche of Web and journalistic articles an the Intranet since the end of 1995, theoretical research has been lacking. Evidence of the business value of the Intranet has been convincing but largely anecdotal. In addition, negative reports have surfaced an hidden costs, performance limitations, and organizational resistance. Such issues have been researched with political theories that explain how some constituents gain and others lose when there is organizational change associated with information technology (IT) implementation. Organizational learning theories also explain such contradictions by examining what affects the creation, integration, and management of knowledge and the facilitation of organizational memory. For example, the theory of organizational knowledge creation posits that autonomy, intention, redundancy, fluctuation and creative chaos, and requisite variety are conditions that induce the transfer of tacit and explicit knowledge in a spiral from individual to group, to organization levels. The findings from this analysis of reported implementations of intranets generate a theoretically based model relating organizational kowledge to the Intranet phenomenon. We extend the inductive concepts by analyzing example of enabling conditions and organizational knowledge creation modes an intranets, using Nonaka's theory of organizational knowledge creation as a guide. Our contribution is to develop a theoretical understanding of the Intranet phenomenon, with an initial framework to guide further conceptual and empirical research an the impacts and business value of the Intranet and to present implications for information systems (IS) developers, IS departments, management, and researchers.

Source

Encyclopedia of library and information science. Vol.70, [=Suppl.33]

0.014447878 = product of:
  0.028895756 = sum of:
    0.015314223 = weight(_text_:library in 2346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015314223 = score(doc=2346,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.11620321 = fieldWeight in 2346, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2346)
    0.013581533 = product of:
      0.027163066 = sum of:
        0.027163066 = weight(_text_:22 in 2346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027163066 = score(doc=2346,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2346, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2346)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Purpose - Potential and benefits of classification schemes and thesauri in building organizational taxonomies cannot be fully utilized by organizations. Empirical data of building an organizational taxonomy by the top-down approach of using classification schemes and thesauri appear to be lacking. The paper seeks to make a contribution in this regard. Design/methodology/approach - A case study of building an organizational taxonomy was conducted in the information studies domain for the Division of Information Studies at Nanyang Technology University, Singapore. The taxonomy was built by using the Dewey Decimal Classification, the Information Science Taxonomy, two information systems taxonomies, and three thesauri (ASIS&T, LISA, and ERIC). Findings - Classification schemes and thesauri were found to be helpful in creating the structure and categories related to the subject facet of the taxonomy, but organizational community sources had to be consulted and several methods had to be employed. The organizational activities and stakeholders' needs had to be identified to determine the objectives, facets, and the subject coverage of the taxonomy. Main categories were determined by identifying the stakeholders' interests and consulting organizational community sources and domain taxonomies. Category terms were selected from terminologies of classification schemes, domain taxonomies, and thesauri against the stakeholders' interests. Hierarchical structures of the main categories were constructed in line with the stakeholders' perspectives and the navigational role taking advantage of structures/term relationships from classification schemes and thesauri. Categories were determined in line with the concepts and the hierarchical levels. Format of categories were uniformed according to a commonly used standard. The consistency principle was employed to make the taxonomy structure and categories neater. Validation of the draft taxonomy through consultations with the stakeholders further refined the taxonomy. Originality/value - No similar study could be traced in the literature. The steps and methods used in the taxonomy development, and the information studies taxonomy itself, will be helpful for library and information schools and other similar organizations in their effort to develop taxonomies for organizing content and aiding navigation on organizational sites.

Date

7.11.2008 15:22:04

0.014067013 = product of:
  0.05626805 = sum of:
    0.05626805 = weight(_text_:library in 546) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05626805 = score(doc=546,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.42695788 = fieldWeight in 546, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=546)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This study seeks to explore and report international business students' perceptions and expectations of electronic library services at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. A total of 143 international business students an campus volunteered to fill out a survey. The results were analyzed using descriptive statistics as weIl as inferential statistics such as t-tests and correlation. A significant portion of international business students has no prior experience with electronic library services in their home countries. Moreover, about a half of international business students go to libraries other than the Business and Economics Library, partly because they provide better environment for study. Although electronic resources are available without the constraint of location, providing reference services for those who do not use the Business and Economics Library becomes a challenge. Virtual reference is an excellent tool, but most international business students do not see it as an important library service. Based an the results, implications for information literacy and virtual reference service are discussed.

0.010770457 = product of:
  0.043081827 = sum of:
    0.043081827 = weight(_text_:digital in 5807) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043081827 = score(doc=5807,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.21790776 = fieldWeight in 5807, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5807)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In der Wirtschaft wie in der Wissenschaft gibt es Begriffe, die, einmal in Umlauf gesetzt, geradezu inflationär auftauchen: derzeit scheint es das WissensManagement zu sein, mit dem man hofft, die zunehmende Komplexität im Geschäftsalltages in den Griff zu bekommen. Mit glänzenden Augen wird von den nahezu unerschöpflichen Möglichkeiten des C-(Content)Business gesprochen, von riesigen neuen Umsatzmärkten und nicht zuletzt vom WissensManagement als Erfolgsfaktor für die Zukunft eines jeden Unternehmens. Oft haben die »Macher« von WissensMangement-Systemen aber »vergessen«, dass es nicht nur darum gehen kann, Informationen zur Verfügung zu stellen - Im Gegenteil: Mehr Informationen bedeuten selten besseres Informiertsein, geschweige denn mehr Wissen. Da wir davon ausgehen können, dass in der Zukunft Arbeiten und Lernen nicht mehr voneinander getrennt sind, und sich damit die Anforderungen an die Mitarbeiter eines Unternehmens enorm verändern werden, muss ein lebendiges WissensManagement adäquate Denkumgebungen schaffen, um auf diese Zukunft angemessen vorbereitet zu sein. Die Autorn befassen sich in ihrer Arbeit mit: Problemstellungen des Wissensmanagements, (Weiter-)Lernen auf digital organisierten Plattformen, mit Fragen der Beratung für Interaktivität im Zusammenhang mit Intra- und Internetlosungen, der Kombination von Informationstechniken mit ästhetischem Ausdruck und multidimensionalem Denken, Entwicklung von Szenarien für Fragen nach der Arbeit der Zukunft (nach der Methodologie von Global Business Network, USA)

0.01018615 = product of:
  0.0407446 = sum of:
    0.0407446 = product of:
      0.0814892 = sum of:
        0.0814892 = weight(_text_:22 in 6878) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0814892 = score(doc=6878,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6878, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6878)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Online Mitteilungen. 2001, Nr.70, S.21-22 [=Mitteilungen VÖB 54(2001) H.2/3]

0.0073997467 = product of:
  0.029598987 = sum of:
    0.029598987 = product of:
      0.059197973 = sum of:
        0.059197973 = weight(_text_:project in 122) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059197973 = score(doc=122,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.27981415 = fieldWeight in 122, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=122)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This paper reports on a portion of a larger ongoing project. We address the issues of information organization and retrieval in large, active commercial websites. More specifically, we address the use of classification for providing access to the contents of such sites. We approach this analysis by describing the functionality and structure of the classification scheme of one such representative, large, active, commercial websites: eBay.com, a web-based auction site for millions of users and items. We compare eBay's classification scheme with the Art & Architecture Thesaurus, which is a tool for describing and providing access to material culture.

0.0073997467 = product of:
  0.029598987 = sum of:
    0.029598987 = product of:
      0.059197973 = sum of:
        0.059197973 = weight(_text_:project in 1400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059197973 = score(doc=1400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.27981415 = fieldWeight in 1400, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1400)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - This article aims to address the concept of information architecture as a way of visualising and describing the various information assets and the interaction of these assets within an enterprise. Design/methodology/approach - The establishment of the information architecture is illustrated through a case study within a large conglomeration of companies requiring scaleable information architecture in order to address its information requirements. Executives who are considered influential in the overall management of the group were interviewed. Findings - The requirements expressed during the interview process, as well as observations made during meetings and general discussions with the various role-players within the enterprise, gave the project team the necessary confirmation of the information requirements of the enterprise. Research limitations/implications - As there is no direct integration between the underlying systems and networks, this had to be taken into consideration for the design of the information architecture. Originality/value - The information architecture established in the enterprise forms the basis of support in delivering future information requirements for the enterprise.

0.0073997467 = product of:
  0.029598987 = sum of:
    0.029598987 = product of:
      0.059197973 = sum of:
        0.059197973 = weight(_text_:project in 1922) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059197973 = score(doc=1922,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.27981415 = fieldWeight in 1922, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1922)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The organisation of knowledge for exploitation and re-use in the modern enterprise is often a most perplexing challenge. The entire knowledge management life-cycle (for example - create, capture, organize, store, search, and transfer) is impacted by the organisation of intellectual capital into a corporate taxonomy or at the least a knowledge map (often incorrectly used interchangeably). Determining the extent to which such an objective is achieved is the focus of what is known as a knowledge audit. In this practice-oriented article, the authors review the fundamentals of creating a taxonomy, the use of metadata in a necessary process known as classification and the role of expertise locators where the knowledge is not explicit but resides within experts in the form of tacit knowledge. The authors conclude with a framework for developing a corporate taxonomy and how such a project may be executed. The conceptual contribution of this article is the postulation that corporate taxonomies that are designed to facilitate knowledge audits lead to greater organizational impact.

0.0067907665 = product of:
  0.027163066 = sum of:
    0.027163066 = product of:
      0.054326132 = sum of:
        0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 6558) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054326132 = score(doc=6558,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6558, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6558)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

1.10.2001 18:19:22

0.0067907665 = product of:
  0.027163066 = sum of:
    0.027163066 = product of:
      0.054326132 = sum of:
        0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 2916) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054326132 = score(doc=2916,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2916, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2916)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

21.11.2004 12:33:22

0.0059419204 = product of:
  0.023767682 = sum of:
    0.023767682 = product of:
      0.047535364 = sum of:
        0.047535364 = weight(_text_:22 in 5675) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047535364 = score(doc=5675,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5675, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5675)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 3.2001 13:20:44

0.0059419204 = product of:
  0.023767682 = sum of:
    0.023767682 = product of:
      0.047535364 = sum of:
        0.047535364 = weight(_text_:22 in 3418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047535364 = score(doc=3418,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3418, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3418)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 5.2005 12:12:23

0.005093075 = product of:
  0.0203723 = sum of:
    0.0203723 = product of:
      0.0407446 = sum of:
        0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 5563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0407446 = score(doc=5563,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5563, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5563)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Pages

S.17-22

0.005093075 = product of:
  0.0203723 = sum of:
    0.0203723 = product of:
      0.0407446 = sum of:
        0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0407446 = score(doc=616,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 616, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=616)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

28.11.2004 13:03:22

0.005093075 = product of:
  0.0203723 = sum of:
    0.0203723 = product of:
      0.0407446 = sum of:
        0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 3419) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0407446 = score(doc=3419,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3419, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3419)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 5.2005 12:16:05

0.0033953832 = product of:
  0.013581533 = sum of:
    0.013581533 = product of:
      0.027163066 = sum of:
        0.027163066 = weight(_text_:22 in 2951) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027163066 = score(doc=2951,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2951, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2951)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

5. 4.2013 10:22:09

0.0029709602 = product of:
  0.011883841 = sum of:
    0.011883841 = product of:
      0.023767682 = sum of:
        0.023767682 = weight(_text_:22 in 2950) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023767682 = score(doc=2950,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 2950, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2950)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

5. 4.2013 10:22:00