Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

0.013561792 = product of:
  0.027123583 = sum of:
    0.027123583 = product of:
      0.054247167 = sum of:
        0.054247167 = weight(_text_:22 in 4654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054247167 = score(doc=4654,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1752617 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050048612 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4654, 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=4654)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 1.2017 17:12:50

0.0084761195 = product of:
  0.016952239 = sum of:
    0.016952239 = product of:
      0.033904478 = sum of:
        0.033904478 = weight(_text_:22 in 1753) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033904478 = score(doc=1753,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1752617 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050048612 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1753, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1753)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 3.2008 12:26:32

0.005746069 = product of:
  0.011492138 = sum of:
    0.011492138 = product of:
      0.04596855 = sum of:
        0.04596855 = weight(_text_:authors in 440) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04596855 = score(doc=440,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.22816232 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050048612 = queryNorm
            0.20147301 = fieldWeight in 440, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=440)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

The chapter by Wilson and Maceviciûtè should have been the first in the book, as it offers an informative, clearly laid out, research-based picture for IM. The chapter offers IM definitions, as mentioned earlier, and also covers a couple of major studies concerned with mapping diversity of content and topics studied in the IM field. RefViz, a visualization tool and an addition to EndNote, was used to map 462 articles published between 1999 and 2004 that had the term information management in their title. Figure 2.1 (Visualization of the IM literature), presents the map's 18 groups or clusters of documents. Two studies by Wilson also are presented. A study completed in 2004 covered the years 2000 to 2004 and reviewed five journals with articles about information activities. The 2004 study analyzed 190 articles from 383 authors. Wilson developed a number of categories about information activities as part of the 2000 and 2004 studies that indicate the scope of the articles analyzed and IM's diversity of subject matter. The remainder of the chapter presents comparative data between the 2000 and 2004 research studies. Joyce Kirk provides a hierarchy of five IM definitions. "IM as IT systems" and "information resource management" are two of these definitions. While it is difficult to clearly recognize any of the hierarchy statements as a definition for IM, what can be had from this hierarchy is the realization, as cviu te' and Wilson state in chapter 2, that IM "is used as an abbreviation for the management of IT, information systems management, management information systems, etc." (p. 20). Perhaps, the critical usefulness of the chapter resides not so much in that it offers any ready to apply definitions for IM but rather in that it provides an overall review about information. The latter can be helpful for a book intended as an information research reader and as an introduction to IM. WidenWulff examined 15 Finnish insurance businesses and developed scales for the measurement of open and closed organizations, and also presented learning organization attributes in different information environments. A 1999 study by Aiki Tibar about critical success factors (CSF) and information needs of successful Estonian companies is the centerpiece of the chapter. The study's findings are presented in relation to previous and more recent research on CSF. The study's methodology was qualitative in nature, involving semistructured interviews with managers and engineers from 25 of the most successful companies in Estonia; these companies were selected in a contest in 1998 as being included in the top 50 most successful companies. In terms of findings, IM was a CFS that was mentioned the most frequently.
Chun Wei Choo focused on environmental analyzability and organizational intrusiveness in an effort to theorize and to highlight intricacies in scanning as managers attempt to deal with uncertainty and complexity in their environment. Correia and Wilson used a case-study approach to examine managerial scanning in 19 companies; 47 semistructured interviews were performed in an effort to develop a grounded theory of scanning. Because of the grounded theory approach, the authors did not use statistical sampling but rather utilized principles of maximum variation sampling and theoretical sampling. Categories and relationships that emerged from the grounded theory approach were utilized to build a model of the environmental process. Judith Broady-Preston presents an interesting discussion on balanced scorecard as a way to keep track of successful strategies and their impact on various areas of organizational performance, including finances, innovation and learning, and customer perceptions. Yet, although there have been three efforts to clarify the purpose of a balanced scorecard, the concept remains unclear, along with a role that information professionals can play in its successful application in organizations. France Bouthillier and Kathleen Shearer set review case studies of five private and five public organizations to bring out elements, practices, and benefits associated with knowledge management (KM). As stated by the authors: "generally speaking, IM involves the integration of a variety of activities designed to manage information and information resources throughout their life cycle" (p. 150). The authors say that the focus of KM initiatives, as opposed to the focus in IM initiatives, tends to be on "knowledge-sharing methodologies such as communities of practice, virtual collaboration and expert databases" (p. 150). In the chapter "The Nonsense of Knowledge Management" revisited by Wilson, he states that communities of practice are at the heart of methodologies for KM. And natural arenas for KM and communities of practice are various disciplines in education and departments in the medical field because of the collaborative spirit in these two fields. But, he also repeats his criticisms that beyond these arenas, there is no such thing as KM in business where competition is the norm rather than collaboration. He emphasizes that a common problem in the KM community is the treatment of knowledge as a thing or a commodity, when in reality, knowledge is a complex and dynamic process. The chapter also provides additional evidence from analysis of various publications that show KM as a fragmented field and as a business fad, according to Wilson.

0.005085672 = product of:
  0.010171344 = sum of:
    0.010171344 = product of:
      0.020342687 = sum of:
        0.020342687 = weight(_text_:22 in 2514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020342687 = score(doc=2514,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1752617 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050048612 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 2514, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2514)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

27.12.2008 11:22:36

0.003591293 = product of:
  0.007182586 = sum of:
    0.007182586 = product of:
      0.028730344 = sum of:
        0.028730344 = weight(_text_:authors in 3347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028730344 = score(doc=3347,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22816232 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050048612 = queryNorm
            0.12592064 = fieldWeight in 3347, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3347)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: Information Research, 9(3), review no. R129 (T.D. Wilson): "The first edition of this book was published ten years ago and rapidly become something of a classic in the field of information seeking behaviour. It is good to see the second edition which incorporates not only the work the author has done since 1993, but also related work by other researchers. Kuhlthau is one of the most cited authors in the field and her model of the information search process, involving stages in the search and associated feelings, has been used by others in a variety of contexts. However, what makes this book different (as was the case with the first edition) is the author's dedication to the field of practice and the book's sub-title demonstrates her commitment to the transfer of research. In Kuhlthau's case this is the practice of the school library media specialist, but her research has covered students of various ages as well as a wide range of occupational groups. Because the information search model is so well known, I shall concentrate in this review on the relationship between the research findings and practice. It is necessary, however, to begin with the search process model, because this is central. Briefly, the model proposes that the searcher goes through the stages of initiation, selection, exploration, formulation, collection and presentation, and, at each stage, experiences various feelings ranging from optimism and satisfaction to confusion and disappointment. Personally, I occasionally suffer despair, but perhaps that is too extreme for most!