Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × subject_ss:"Wissensmanagement"
  1. Lambe, P.: Organising knowledge : taxonomies, knowledge and organisational effectiveness (2007) 0.01
    0.009906992 = product of:
      0.029720977 = sum of:
        0.019267835 = weight(_text_:wide in 1804) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019267835 = score(doc=1804,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19679762 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044416238 = queryNorm
            0.09790685 = fieldWeight in 1804, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1804)
        0.010453141 = weight(_text_:web in 1804) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010453141 = score(doc=1804,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044416238 = queryNorm
            0.07211407 = fieldWeight in 1804, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1804)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Footnote
    Rez. in: KO 34(2007) no.4, S.266-267 (E. Quintarelli): "The knowledge and information world we live in can rarely be described from a single coherent and predictable point of view. In the global economy and mass society, an explosion of knowledge sources, different paradigms and information-seeking behaviors, fruition contexts and access devices are overloading our existence with an incredible amount of signals and stimulations, all competing for our limited attention. Taxonomies are often cited as tools to cope with, organize and make sense of this complex and ambiguous environment. Leveraging an extensive review of literature from a variety of disciplines, as well as a wide range of relevant real-life case studies, Organising Knowledge by Patrick Lambe has the great merit of liberating taxonomies from their recurring obscure and limitative definition, making them living, evolving and working tools to manage knowledge within organizations. Primarily written for knowledge and information managers, this book can help a much larger audience of practitioners and students who wish to design, develop and maintain taxonomies for large-scale coordination and organizational effectiveness both within and across societies. Patrick Lambe opens ours eyes to the fact that, far from being just a synonym for pure hierarchical trees to improve navigation, find-ability and information retrieval, taxonomies take multiple forms (from lists, to trees, facets and system maps) and play different roles, ranging from basic information organization to more subtle tasks, such as establishing common ground, overcoming boundaries, discovering new opportunities and helping in sense-making.
    While each single paragraph of the book is packed with valuable advice and real-life experience, I consider the last chapter to be the most intriguing and ground-breaking one. It's only here that taxonomists meet folksonomists and ontologists in a fundamental attempt to write a new page on the relative position between old and emerging classification techniques. In a well-balanced and sober analysis that foregoes excessive enthusiasm in favor of more appropriate considerations about content scale, domain maturity, precision and cost, knowledge infrastructure tools are all arrayed from inexpensive and expressive folksonomies on one side, to the smart, formal, machine-readable but expensive world of ontologies on the other. In light of so many different tools, information infrastructure clearly appears more as a complex dynamic ecosystem than a static overly designed environment. Such a variety of tasks, perspectives, work activities and paradigms calls for a resilient, adaptive and flexible knowledge environment with a minimum of standardization and uniformity. The right mix of tools and approaches can only be determined case by case, by carefully considering the particular objectives and requirements of the organization while aiming to maximize its overall performance and effectiveness. Starting from the history of taxonomy-building and ending with the emerging trends in Web technologies, artificial intelligence and social computing, Organising Knowledge is thus both a guiding tool and inspirational reading, not only about taxonomies, but also about effectiveness, collaboration and finding middle ground: exactly the right principles to make your intranet, portal or document management tool a rich, evolving and long-lasting ecosystem."
  2. Abbas, J.: Structures for organizing knowledge : exploring taxonomies, ontologies, and other schemas (2010) 0.01
    0.008028265 = product of:
      0.04816959 = sum of:
        0.04816959 = weight(_text_:wide in 480) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04816959 = score(doc=480,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19679762 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044416238 = queryNorm
            0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 480, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=480)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    LIS professionals use structures for organizing knowledge when they catalog and classify objects in the collection, when they develop databases, when they design customized taxonomies, or when they search online. Structures for Organizing Knowledge: Exploring Taxonomies, Ontologies, and Other Schema explores and explains this basic function by looking at three questions: 1) How do we organize objects so that they make sense and are useful? 2) What role do categories, classifications, taxonomies, and other structures play in the process of organizing? 3) What do information professionals need to know about organizing behaviors in order to design useful structures for organizing knowledge? Taking a broad, yet specialized approach that is a first in the field, this book answers those questions by examining three threads: traditional structures for organizing knowledge; personal structures for organizing knowledge; and socially-constructed structures for organizing knowledge. Through these threads, it offers avenues for expanding thinking on classification and classification schemes, taxonomy and ontology development, and structures. Both a history of the development of taxonomies and an analysis of current research, theories, and applications, this volume explores a wide array of topics, including the new digital, social aspect of taxonomy development. Examples of subjects covered include: Formal and informal structures Applications of knowledge structures Classification schemes Early taxonomists and their contributions Social networking, bookmarking, and cataloging sites Cataloging codes Standards and best practices Tags, tagging, and folksonomies Descriptive cataloging Metadata schema standards Thought exercises, references, and a list of helpful websites augment each section. A final chapter, "Thinking Ahead: Are We at a Crossroads?" uses "envisioning exercises" to help LIS professionals look into the future.
  3. Kmuche, W.: Strategischer Erfolgsfaktor Wissen : Content Management: der Weg zum erfolgreichen Informationsmanagement (2000) 0.01
    0.007020752 = product of:
      0.04212451 = sum of:
        0.04212451 = product of:
          0.08424902 = sum of:
            0.08424902 = weight(_text_:22 in 644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08424902 = score(doc=644,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1555381 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.044416238 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 644, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=644)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Date
    19. 7.2002 22:05:14