Search (86 results, page 1 of 5)

0.06873091 = product of:
  0.103096366 = sum of:
    0.082582794 = weight(_text_:interest in 884) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.082582794 = score(doc=884,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.3293521 = fieldWeight in 884, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=884)
    0.02051357 = product of:
      0.04102714 = sum of:
        0.04102714 = weight(_text_:22 in 884) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04102714 = score(doc=884,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 884, 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=884)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Peter Drucker (1993) claims that Western profit and non-profit organizations are not becoming more labour-intensive, material-intensive or capital-intensive, but more knowledge-intensive. The government of the Netherlands not only shares this vision but actively propagates it. Knowledge on the Move (1995), the memorandum drafted by the Ministry of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Agriculture, Nature Conservation and Fisheries and Ministry of Education, Cultural Affairs and Science, places the national interest inherent in knowledge (for organizations) explicitly on the agenda. Conscious knowledge management is crucial to the future of the Netherlands. If the Netherlands wishes to be regarded as a knowledge-intensive country then the supply of and demand for knowledge must be encouraged.

Source

Knowledge management: organization competence and methodolgy. Proceedings of the Fourth International ISMICK Symposium, 21-22 October 1996, Netherlands. Ed.: J.F. Schreinemakers

0.04582061 = product of:
  0.06873091 = sum of:
    0.055055197 = weight(_text_:interest in 908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055055197 = score(doc=908,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.21956807 = fieldWeight in 908, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=908)
    0.013675713 = product of:
      0.027351426 = sum of:
        0.027351426 = weight(_text_:22 in 908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027351426 = score(doc=908,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 908, 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=908)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

As interest in the study of complex systems has grown, a new vocabulary is emerging to describe discoveries about wide-ranging and fundamental phenomena. Complexity theory research has allowed for new insights into many phenomena and for the development of a new language. 'his paper argues that a shared language based an the vocabulary of complexity can have an important role in a management context. The use of complexity theory metaphors can change the way managers think about the problems they face. Instead of competing in a game or a war, they are trying to find their way an an ever changing, ever turbulent landscape. Such a conception of their organizations' basic task can, in cum, change the day-to-day decisions made by management. If part of the problem of knowledge management is the need to identify value added knowledge, language and metaphor play a key role - for they are the very tools of the identification [what is knowledge] and ascription [what makes it value-added] process. Complexity theory metaphors, it is argued, are not panaceas. There are limits to the types of organizations where the notion of a "fitness landscape" and "degree of coupling" can make a positive contribution to managements understanding of the world. The author argues that one potential distinction - between worlds where complexity metaphors can contribute and those where they cannot - can be drawn by measuring the degree to which an organization perceives that value-added investments are to be made in a) the development of new knowledge or b) infrastructure. In this context, infrastructure is defined as those items to which an economist might (once such investment is made) ascribe the label "sunk costs", but which management would not willingly walk away from. For this purpose then, emotional investments, legacy systems, existing bureaucracy, and material goods could all constitute "infrastructure". Infrastructure investments it is argued are pari of what Brian Arthur of the Sante Fe Institute defines as the world of diminishing retums. Investments in knowledge are different. While the ability of an organization to effectively deal wich new knowledge is limited by a variety of constraints, the leverage which can be obtained from such knowledge gives rise to the potential for increasing retums. As organizations leam to remove some of the constraints an their ability to absorb and lever new information, they force themselves down to the increasing retums part of the "S" curve. Several case studies are presented to illustrate the potency of complexity metaphors in driving managerial perceptions of knowledge management businesses.

Source

Knowledge management: organization competence and methodolgy. Proceedings of the Fourth International ISMICK Symposium, 21-22 October 1996, Netherlands. Ed.: J.F. Schreinemakers

0.032115534 = product of:
  0.0963466 = sum of:
    0.0963466 = weight(_text_:interest in 3995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0963466 = score(doc=3995,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.38424414 = fieldWeight in 3995, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3995)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The purposes and benefits of a strategic planning policy which seeks to relate an organisation and its people to their changing environment and to the threats and opportunities of the marketplace is contrasted with the broader concept of strategic management. Emphasises the value of planning as a continuous process, the need for an holistic view, and for the involvement of stakeholders; i.e. all those with an interest or involvement in the organisation. Some recommended models from the large volume of literature on this topic are given, together with advice on the most effective way to present the final strategic plan

0.032115534 = product of:
  0.0963466 = sum of:
    0.0963466 = weight(_text_:interest in 5828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0963466 = score(doc=5828,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.38424414 = fieldWeight in 5828, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5828)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

A short personal view on the development of the Internet phenomenon is given. It is argued that the Internet is a powerful paradigm of change and community building. Changes which enable the learning organization are of particular interest. This is investigated in the context of corporate training using, or learning from, the Internet. Next, capabilities and rigidities of the net as a knowledge management tool rather than yet another way to distribute unwanted information, are listed. Finally, the important lessons learnt from the success of the Internet are linked to the future of marketing the Internet world wide

0.029067773 = product of:
  0.08720332 = sum of:
    0.08720332 = sum of:
      0.05985189 = weight(_text_:classification in 2346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05985189 = score(doc=2346,freq=14.0), product of:
          0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05046903 = queryNorm
          0.37237754 = fieldWeight in 2346, product of:
            3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
              14.0 = termFreq=14.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2346)
      0.027351426 = weight(_text_:22 in 2346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.027351426 = score(doc=2346,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05046903 = 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)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

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

0.022939665 = product of:
  0.068818994 = sum of:
    0.068818994 = weight(_text_:interest in 4512) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.068818994 = score(doc=4512,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.27446008 = fieldWeight in 4512, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4512)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

Key Features - Identifies particular types of organisation (in terms of culture/structure) rather than industry sector categories. Thus, readers will be able to position their organisation within this framework - The solutions to overcome the problems are pragmatic and based an the day-to-day experiences of the author The Author Paul Byfield is a Legal Information Specialist at the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Readership Information and knowledge workers in all organisations. Students an library and information management courses will also find the book of interest. Contents Introduction - what is a complex organisation? What particular features are unique to these organisations? Departmental rivalry in organisations - how important is it; does it/should it influence the information management process? Making information management work - basic principles of information management; people/culture; structure; technology; other resources Culture of communication - who does it and why; who should the information professionals be talking to? Using technology - is it a panacea or a Pandora's Box? Gatekeepers or teachers - how should information workers model themselves in complex organisations; how does the information worker survive in this environment? Conclusion - is information management more difficult in this type of environment?

0.020822216 = product of:
  0.062466644 = sum of:
    0.062466644 = sum of:
      0.028277358 = weight(_text_:classification in 907) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.028277358 = score(doc=907,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05046903 = queryNorm
          0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 907, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=907)
      0.034189284 = weight(_text_:22 in 907) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034189284 = score(doc=907,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05046903 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 907, 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=907)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Knowledge-containing documents and data about knowledge have been handled in stable environments by bureaucratic systems using very stable knowledge ontologies. These systems, though not always very effective in such environments, will become highly ineffective in environments where knowledge has to be updated and replaced frequently. Moreover, organizations in such dynamic environments also use knowledge from extemal resources extensively. This makes the development of a stable ontology for knowledge storage and retrieval particularly complicated. This paper describes eight context classes of knowledge ontology development and explores elements of a method for ontology development. These classes are based an the differences in contexts defined along three dimensions: knowledge dynamics, complexity and social dispersion. Ontology development matches these contexts and ontology needs defined by (logical and social) structure and ontology maturity. The classification framework and methodology are applied to two cases. The first case illustrates a descriptive use of our framework to characterize ontology development in an academic environment. The second case illustrates a normative use of our framework. The method proposed seemed to be empirically valid and rich and be useful for detecting options for ontology improvement.

Source

Knowledge management: organization competence and methodolgy. Proceedings of the Fourth International ISMICK Symposium, 21-22 October 1996, Netherlands. Ed.: J.F. Schreinemakers

0.019340381 = product of:
  0.058021143 = sum of:
    0.058021143 = product of:
      0.116042286 = sum of:
        0.116042286 = weight(_text_:22 in 4179) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.116042286 = score(doc=4179,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 4179, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4179)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

29.11.1999 12:18:22

Source

International Herald Tribune. 15. Nov. 1999, S.22

0.018351734 = product of:
  0.055055197 = sum of:
    0.055055197 = weight(_text_:interest in 278) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055055197 = score(doc=278,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.21956807 = fieldWeight in 278, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=278)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

For senior executives, the ability to work with large quantities of information - sorting the wheat from the chaff- has long been recognised as a key determinant of achievement. What an executive believes to be important information can have a significant influence on what they think and how they think about it. Senior executives, because of their critical leadership role, are challenged in their daily lives to develop effective ways of acquiring, using and sharing important information. Some executives are undoubtedly better than others in how they handle such information and there is a high level of interest in identifying those information behavior characteristics that lead to executive excellence (Davenport & Prusak, 1998). Because of their position within organizations, CEOs - those senior executives who have overall responsibility for the management of the organization or business unit - are particularly concerned with enhancing their information behavior. CEOs have the task of managing the organization so that it achieves its strategic goals and objectives. And a critical part of this task is becoming highly effective in managing a wide range of information and in developing skills of influence and decision making. It is therefore important for us to understand how senior executives handle information on a day-to-day basis. What information do they consider important? And why? Several studies have sought to address these questions with varying degrees of success. Some have set out to better understand what type of information senior executives need (McLeod & Jones, 1987) while other studies have attempted to provide a comprehensive theoretical base for executive work (Mintzberg, 1968; 1973; 1975). Yet other work has tried to devise various tools and methodologies for eliciting the unique information requirements of individual executives (Rockart, 1979).

0.018351734 = product of:
  0.055055197 = sum of:
    0.055055197 = weight(_text_:interest in 4246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055055197 = score(doc=4246,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.21956807 = fieldWeight in 4246, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4246)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

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.

0.018234285 = product of:
  0.054702852 = sum of:
    0.054702852 = product of:
      0.109405704 = sum of:
        0.109405704 = weight(_text_:22 in 2027) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.109405704 = score(doc=2027,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2027, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2027)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Insider. 1995, Nr.4, Juli, S.19-22

0.018234285 = product of:
  0.054702852 = sum of:
    0.054702852 = product of:
      0.109405704 = sum of:
        0.109405704 = weight(_text_:22 in 6563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.109405704 = score(doc=6563,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 6563, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6563)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 2.1997 19:42:34

0.016220793 = product of:
  0.04866238 = sum of:
    0.04866238 = weight(_text_:interest in 3586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04866238 = score(doc=3586,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.25074318 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05046903 = queryNorm
        0.19407259 = fieldWeight in 3586, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.9682584 = idf(docFreq=835, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3586)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 56(2005) no.8, S.889-890 (J. Warner): "This work is a collection of papers, reflective and theoretical, rather than primarily empirical, from scholars in information systems and economies, with discursive rather than formal modes of argument and presentation. The discipline of information systems (IS) is understood to have developed as codified knowledge about appropriate procedures for the development of customized information and communication technology (ICT) applications. The editors recognize that, with the displacement of customized applications by purchased packages, IS lost its main utility as a prescription for professional practice in the 1990s. The need for the scholarly community to establish its continuing value and to survive might be orte motivation for the increasing resort to theory. A difference in perspective between IS and economies is acknowledged: economiet take an outside-in approach to the results of innovation while IS focuses an the process of innovation. Recognition does not extend to synthesis, and a dynamic by which the process of Innovation both generates and is compelled by the resulting sociotechnical environment is not isolated. The literature of information science is not cited-other writers have noted the analogies between the subjects and disjunctions between the disciplines of IS and information science (Ellis, Allen, & Wilson, 1999)-but interdisciplinary dialogue is advocated. For information science readers, the interest of the work lies in the analogies between topics treated and the emerging theoretical reflection an them. Theory seems to have emerged primarily as a response to empirical difficulties, particularly contradictions between expectations and reality, and can reproduce the divides which motivated it. Empirical generalizations are not distinguished from the motivating forces which created the phenomena covered by those generalizations. For instance, the social constructivist perspective which argues that impact of technology is a matter of interpretation by human actors according to their social conditions, and which acknowledges the interpretive flexibility of a technology in use, is introduced, but technology is not fully recognized as a radical human construction, "organs of the human brain, created by the human hand" (Marx, 1973, p. 706; Warner, 2004), and the notion of impact is retained. The productivity paradox, understood as the weak correlation between investment in ICT and commercial success, forms a recurrent concern. A simple response might that the commercial value of a technology lies in the way it is used. More sophisticatedly the paradox could be regarded as an artifact of the apparent rigor and closeness, particularly temporal closeness, of studies and could be reinterpreted as a productivity effect, corresponding to a transition cost. The conclusion does not recall the distinction between invention, innovation, and diffusion, promised in the preface, and invention tends to be treated as if it were exogenous. The most interesting insights emerge from accounts of cited papers, particularly Ciborra's view of technology as being assimilated to the social by the device of hospitality and Orlikowski's reflections an technology.
Could a dynamic be constructed, in dialectical response to the theorizing presented, which draws an classic sources in political economy and which links micro-processes and macro-results? For Marx, the "basic logie of the capitalist mode of production ... [was] expansion, growth, enlarged reproduction, through a substitution of living by dead labour" (Marx, 1981, p. 13). With ICTs, we are dealing primarily with semiotic rather than physical labor, but a similar substitution of machine for direct human labor can be detected. The individual actors engaged in innovation encounter considerable risks, but collectively produce advances in social productivity: The much greater costs that are always involved in an enterprise based an new inventions, compared with later establishments that rise up an its ruins, ex suis ossibus. The extent of this is so great that the pioneering entrepreneurs generally go bankrupt, and it is only their successors who flourish.. . . Thus it is generally only the most worthless and wretched kind of money-capitalists that draw the greatest profit from all new developments of the universal labour of the human spirit and their social application by combined labour. (Marx, 1981, p. 199). Acknowledging the risks of innovation reveals the resistance of small entities to innovation as more rational for their survival than the scholarly prescriptions of the value of innovation for competitive advantage. The comparative advantage derivable from innovation can itself be understood from the relation of machinery to the direct human labor it supplants: As machinery comes into general use in a particular branch of production, the social value of the machinery product sinks down to its individual value, and the following law asserts itself: surplus-value does not arise from the labour-power that has been replaced by the machinery, but from the labour-power actually employed in working with the machinery. (Marx, 1976, p. 530) The more sophisticated theoretical and historical framework can both explain and dissolve the productivity paradox. The risks of Innovation limit rewards to pioneers, but, over time, their activities raise the productivity of labor: Consider, for instance, the contrast between the amount of direct human labor and the costs of that labor involved in Che copying of documents by hand, with a subsequent oral collation, in a mid-19th century legal practice (Melville, 1997) with modern technologies for copying files. In conclusion, the interest of the collection to information science lies in the further revelation of analogous concerns in another discipline, in the internal realization of the theoretical poverty of that discipline, and even, at points, that the control over processes of innovation offered by standard approaches was illusory, and in the emergence, not yet in fully articulated form, of a more sophisticated perspective."

0.015955 = product of:
  0.047864996 = sum of:
    0.047864996 = product of:
      0.09572999 = sum of:
        0.09572999 = weight(_text_:22 in 4545) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09572999 = score(doc=4545,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4545, 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=4545)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 7.1996 10:51:56

0.015955 = product of:
  0.047864996 = sum of:
    0.047864996 = product of:
      0.09572999 = sum of:
        0.09572999 = weight(_text_:22 in 6819) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09572999 = score(doc=6819,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6819, 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=6819)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

8. 3.1997 13:34:22

0.015955 = product of:
  0.047864996 = sum of:
    0.047864996 = product of:
      0.09572999 = sum of:
        0.09572999 = weight(_text_:22 in 644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09572999 = score(doc=644,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = 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)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

19. 7.2002 22:05:14

0.013675714 = product of:
  0.04102714 = sum of:
    0.04102714 = product of:
      0.08205428 = sum of:
        0.08205428 = weight(_text_:22 in 348) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08205428 = score(doc=348,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 348, 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=348)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Technik und Information: Markt, Medien und Methoden. Deutscher Dokumentartag 1992, Technische Universität Berlin, 22.-25.9.1992. Hrsg.: W. Neubauer u. K.-H. Meier

0.013675714 = product of:
  0.04102714 = sum of:
    0.04102714 = product of:
      0.08205428 = sum of:
        0.08205428 = weight(_text_:22 in 349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08205428 = score(doc=349,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 349, 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=349)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Technik und Information: Markt, Medien und Methoden. Deutscher Dokumentartag 1992, Technische Universität Berlin, 22.-25.9.1992. Hrsg.: W. Neubauer u. K.-H. Meier

0.013675714 = product of:
  0.04102714 = sum of:
    0.04102714 = product of:
      0.08205428 = sum of:
        0.08205428 = weight(_text_:22 in 350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08205428 = score(doc=350,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 350, 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=350)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Technik und Information: Markt, Medien und Methoden. Deutscher Dokumentartag 1992, Technische Universität Berlin, 22.-25.9.1992. Hrsg.: W. Neubauer u. K.-H. Meier

0.013675714 = product of:
  0.04102714 = sum of:
    0.04102714 = product of:
      0.08205428 = sum of:
        0.08205428 = weight(_text_:22 in 627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08205428 = score(doc=627,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17673394 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 627, 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=627)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 2.1997 19:44:14