Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0075122504 = product of:
  0.015024501 = sum of:
    0.015024501 = product of:
      0.0450735 = sum of:
        0.0450735 = weight(_text_:22 in 2749) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0450735 = score(doc=2749,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.16815145 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048018172 = queryNorm
            0.268053 = fieldWeight in 2749, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2749)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Classification

658.4/038 22

Date

22. 3.2009 18:43:51

DDC

658.4/038 22

0.0043372 = product of:
  0.0086744 = sum of:
    0.0086744 = product of:
      0.026023198 = sum of:
        0.026023198 = weight(_text_:22 in 320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026023198 = score(doc=320,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16815145 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048018172 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 320, 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=320)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 5.2007 10:37:38

0.0033821356 = product of:
  0.0067642713 = sum of:
    0.0067642713 = product of:
      0.020292813 = sum of:
        0.020292813 = weight(_text_:12 in 4579) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020292813 = score(doc=4579,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048018172 = queryNorm
            0.15279384 = fieldWeight in 4579, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4579)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 69(2918) no.12, S.1521-1522 (Suliman Hawamdeh).

0.0027057086 = product of:
  0.005411417 = sum of:
    0.005411417 = product of:
      0.01623425 = sum of:
        0.01623425 = weight(_text_:12 in 2866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01623425 = score(doc=2866,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048018172 = queryNorm
            0.12223507 = fieldWeight in 2866, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2866)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

20. 6.2009 12:46:20

0.0023674949 = product of:
  0.0047349897 = sum of:
    0.0047349897 = product of:
      0.014204969 = sum of:
        0.014204969 = weight(_text_:12 in 2862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014204969 = score(doc=2862,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048018172 = queryNorm
            0.106955685 = fieldWeight in 2862, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2862)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

25. 7.2007 12:27:02

0.0020292813 = product of:
  0.0040585627 = sum of:
    0.0040585627 = product of:
      0.012175688 = sum of:
        0.012175688 = weight(_text_:12 in 609) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012175688 = score(doc=609,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048018172 = queryNorm
            0.0916763 = fieldWeight in 609, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=609)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 58(2007) no.12, S.1909-1910 (Andrea Japzon): "Jay Liebowitz has written extensively on expert systems, knowledge management (KM), and information systems, as evidenced by the publication of almost 30 books and more than 200 articles on the subjects. What They Didn't Tell You about Knowledge Management offers a concise practical guide specifically for the LIS professional. The hook is best suited to those LIS professionals who arc currently involved with a KM initiative, are interested in pursuing a career in KM, or are working in corporate or government libraries. The hook is concise with only 84 pages of text and another 20 pages of appendices. This work provides only the briefest of overviews on KM, making it a starting point for the uninitiated. For richer descriptions and greater development of KM concepts and practices, The Knowledge Management Yearbook (Cortada & Woods, 2000) or Liebowitz's Knowledge Management Handbook (1999) should be consulted. The hook is filled with charts, bulleted lists, and excerpts from other publications meant to quickly guide the reader through the knowledge-management landscape. These examples are from KM in practice and provide the reader with a sense of how KM manifests itself in the workplace. While the examples are the strength of the book, Liebowitz does not explain or describe them in enough detail to integrate them into the work as a whole. However, the references that accompany each chapter are well chosen and provide the reader with the opportunity to explore in greater detail any of the concepts or practices presented.

0.0013528543 = product of:
  0.0027057086 = sum of:
    0.0027057086 = product of:
      0.008117125 = sum of:
        0.008117125 = weight(_text_:12 in 440) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008117125 = score(doc=440,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048018172 = queryNorm
            0.061117534 = fieldWeight in 440, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=440)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Allen strikes a realistic note of the institutional importance of trust across teams of academics and administrators, and subsequently of the political behavior of academics and computer services administrators/ managers and the relation of the latter to information strategy formulation. Research was conducted at 12 university sites, information strategy process documents were analyzed, and 20 informants were interviewed at each site. The study's research focused on cross-case analysis (instead of an iterative approach to collection and analysis of data), research was longitudinal, and a grounded theory approach was employed. According to the author, findings confirm a similar position taken by Pettigrew (1977): "development of information strategy is the outcome of negotiated political relations" (p. 177). And for such negotiated political relations, the author concludes, trust is a necessary ingredient. It is important to reiterate that IM's scope requires a diversity of study methods and methodologies to address all issues involved. A multiplicity of information and IM definitions and the number of local and global issues that must be addressed, along with information's significance as resource and/or commodity in different types of organizations, necessitate diversity in information research. Each chapter has demonstrated a need to cover many aspects of IM and to ensure that there is as much clarity in that effort as possible, and yet differentiation of IM from other related fields such as KM clearly remains a top issue. As with any other effort to define a field's boundaries, the task at hand is not easy, but while definitions and boundaries are being worked out, there is always an opportunity to engage in fruitful discussions about scope and critical issues in information research."