Search (186 results, page 1 of 10)

0.1756225 = product of:
  0.29270414 = sum of:
    0.06751644 = product of:
      0.20254931 = sum of:
        0.20254931 = weight(_text_:3a in 2918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.20254931 = score(doc=2918,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.36039644 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 2918, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2918)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.20254931 = weight(_text_:2f in 2918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20254931 = score(doc=2918,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.36039644 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042509552 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 2918, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2918)
    0.022638384 = product of:
      0.04527677 = sum of:
        0.04527677 = weight(_text_:management in 2918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04527677 = score(doc=2918,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.31599492 = fieldWeight in 2918, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2918)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)

Abstract

The employees of an organization often use a personal hierarchical classification scheme to organize digital documents that are stored on their own workstations. As this may make it hard for other employees to retrieve these documents, there is a risk that the organization will lose track of needed documentation. Furthermore, the inherent boundaries of such a hierarchical structure require making arbitrary decisions about which specific criteria the classification will b.e based on (for instance, the administrative activity or the document type, although a document can have several attributes and require classification in several classes).A faceted classification model to support corporate information organization is proposed. Partially based on Ranganathan's facets theory, this model aims not only to standardize the organization of digital documents, but also to simplify the management of a document throughout its life cycle for both individuals and organizations, while ensuring compliance to regulatory and policy requirements.

Footnote

Vgl.: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?reload=true&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fiel5%2F4755313%2F4755314%2F04755480.pdf%3Farnumber%3D4755480&authDecision=-203.

0.0864634 = product of:
  0.2161585 = sum of:
    0.19481482 = weight(_text_:inc in 1604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.19481482 = score(doc=1604,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2573945 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0549803 = idf(docFreq=281, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042509552 = queryNorm
        0.75687253 = fieldWeight in 1604, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.0549803 = idf(docFreq=281, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1604)
    0.021343673 = product of:
      0.042687345 = sum of:
        0.042687345 = weight(_text_:management in 1604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042687345 = score(doc=1604,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.29792285 = fieldWeight in 1604, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1604)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Der Aufsatz beschreibt die Planung der Dokumentation des EXPO 2000 Hannover GmbH, dem Organisator der Weltausstellung im Jahr 2000. Bei der Planung wirkte die Unternehmens- und Technologieberatung Arthur D. Little Inc. mit. Der Aufsatz stellt eine bisher in der Literatur einmalige Beschreibung der betrieblichen Dokumentationsplanung in Projektform dar. Es werden die Projektphasen und Dokumentationsprozesse in Kurzform geschildert

Theme

Information Resources Management

0.039774638 = product of:
  0.09943659 = sum of:
    0.08609679 = weight(_text_:inc in 5863) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08609679 = score(doc=5863,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2573945 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0549803 = idf(docFreq=281, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042509552 = queryNorm
        0.33449355 = fieldWeight in 5863, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0549803 = idf(docFreq=281, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5863)
    0.013339795 = product of:
      0.02667959 = sum of:
        0.02667959 = weight(_text_:management in 5863) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02667959 = score(doc=5863,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 5863, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5863)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Retrievaltests sind die anerkannteste Methode, um neue Verfahren der Inhaltserschließung gegenüber traditionellen Verfahren zu rechtfertigen. Im Rahmen einer Diplomarbeit wurden zwei grundsätzlich unterschiedliche Systeme der automatischen inhaltlichen Erschließung anhand der Pressedatenbank des Verlagshauses Gruner + Jahr (G+J) getestet und evaluiert. Untersucht wurde dabei natürlichsprachliches Retrieval im Vergleich zu Booleschem Retrieval. Bei den beiden Systemen handelt es sich zum einen um Autonomy von Autonomy Inc. und DocCat, das von IBM an die Datenbankstruktur der G+J Pressedatenbank angepasst wurde. Ersteres ist ein auf natürlichsprachlichem Retrieval basierendes, probabilistisches System. DocCat demgegenüber basiert auf Booleschem Retrieval und ist ein lernendes System, das aufgrund einer intellektuell erstellten Trainingsvorlage indexiert. Methodisch geht die Evaluation vom realen Anwendungskontext der Textdokumentation von G+J aus. Die Tests werden sowohl unter statistischen wie auch qualitativen Gesichtspunkten bewertet. Ein Ergebnis der Tests ist, dass DocCat einige Mängel gegenüber der intellektuellen Inhaltserschließung aufweist, die noch behoben werden müssen, während das natürlichsprachliche Retrieval von Autonomy in diesem Rahmen und für die speziellen Anforderungen der G+J Textdokumentation so nicht einsetzbar ist

Source

Information Research & Content Management: Orientierung, Ordnung und Organisation im Wissensmarkt; 23. DGI-Online-Tagung der DGI und 53. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Informationswissenschaft und Informationspraxis e.V. DGI, Frankfurt am Main, 8.-10.5.2001. Proceedings. Hrsg.: R. Schmidt

0.03538187 = product of:
  0.17690934 = sum of:
    0.17690934 = sum of:
      0.11931477 = weight(_text_:management in 1000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.11931477 = score(doc=1000,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.83271974 = fieldWeight in 1000, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1000)
      0.05759458 = weight(_text_:22 in 1000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05759458 = score(doc=1000,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1000, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1000)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Describes 3 records management approaches to electronic records and assesses the archival interests involved in each. Suggests utilizing the Information Management methodology to devise an organization wide Information Management Plan, incorporating records management and archival requirements, to facilitate the identification of records of value to the organization to be managed as any other corporate asset

Source

Archives and manuscripts. 22(1994) no.1, S.106-122

0.028107211 = product of:
  0.14053605 = sum of:
    0.14053605 = sum of:
      0.08352033 = weight(_text_:management in 2430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08352033 = score(doc=2430,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.5829038 = fieldWeight in 2430, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2430)
      0.057015724 = weight(_text_:22 in 2430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.057015724 = score(doc=2430,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.38301262 = fieldWeight in 2430, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2430)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Records management has appeared lately in France to designate the management of organizational documents and electronic data an enterprise must retain as proof of its activities and transactions. An international standard is under discussion to address issues concerned with retention. At the same time, some information professionals are finding themselves increasingly involved with active company records, since the role of records manager requires skills found in the professions of archivists, information scientist and quality controller. Presents examples which pose the question, is records management in fact a new profession or simply a new form of a familiar job?

Date

1. 8.1996 22:01:00
31.12.1998 15:32:22

Footnote

Übers. d. Titels: Records management: new concept or old practice?

0.028107211 = product of:
  0.14053605 = sum of:
    0.14053605 = sum of:
      0.08352033 = weight(_text_:management in 2988) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08352033 = score(doc=2988,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.5829038 = fieldWeight in 2988, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2988)
      0.057015724 = weight(_text_:22 in 2988) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.057015724 = score(doc=2988,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.38301262 = fieldWeight in 2988, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2988)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

An article in documentaliste 35(1998) no.1, presented the concept and contexts for the application of records management. This article, devoted to the experience of archivists, continues to focus on professional active and semi-active records management practices and their evolution in different countries and eras. P. Barbat analyzes the discovery in France in the 1960s of active records and the invlovement of both archivists and the departments actually generating the records in their management, and the impact this development has had on archival practices. Also discusses the impact that the international standard now being drafted by ISO will have on the profession. A government and a company archivist also describe their experience

Date

1. 8.1996 22:01:00
21. 2.1999 15:22:35

Footnote

Übers. d. Titels: Records management and French archival practices

0.026628902 = product of:
  0.13314451 = sum of:
    0.13314451 = sum of:
      0.06403102 = weight(_text_:management in 1001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06403102 = score(doc=1001,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.44688427 = fieldWeight in 1001, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1001)
      0.06911349 = weight(_text_:22 in 1001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06911349 = score(doc=1001,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1001, 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=1001)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

Issues devoted in part to the topic of: Electronic recordkeeping issues and perspectives; covering techniques of records management involving electronic archival materials

Source

Archives and manuscripts. 22(1994) no.1, S.14-135

0.026361628 = product of:
  0.13180813 = sum of:
    0.13180813 = sum of:
      0.09149193 = weight(_text_:management in 2787) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09149193 = score(doc=2787,freq=12.0), product of:
          0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.6385391 = fieldWeight in 2787, product of:
            3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
              12.0 = termFreq=12.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2787)
      0.0403162 = weight(_text_:22 in 2787) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0403162 = score(doc=2787,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2787, 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=2787)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Identifies some of the fundamental issues for the future records management, and assesses their relevance for the future. Considers traditional records management and suggests a new record keeping approach which impacts directly upon the organization by ensuring records are properly created according to the organization's needs. Stresses the importance of making better use of new technologies. Important issues are: the myth of the information manager, implementation of records management standards, replacing the life cycle approach with one of a records continuum, new relationships between the archival and records management community, and development of competency based standards

Date

24. 1.1999 12:22:46

Source

Records management bulletin. 1997, no.82, S.11-15,18

0.024767308 = product of:
  0.12383653 = sum of:
    0.12383653 = sum of:
      0.08352033 = weight(_text_:management in 5049) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08352033 = score(doc=5049,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.5829038 = fieldWeight in 5049, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5049)
      0.0403162 = weight(_text_:22 in 5049) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0403162 = score(doc=5049,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5049, 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=5049)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Explores the newly emerging information discipline of records management, focusing on its current status in the UK where it is represented by a range of sector specific and general organizations for information professionals. While records management involves some skills and knowledge which are different from those already mastered by library and information professionals, there are significant overlaps in terms of cataloguing, classification, indexing, identifying and meeting user needs and the challenge of dealing with information in electronic form. Concludes that, in the changing and sometimes shrinking market of of some of the more traditional library sectors, records management may offer the opportunity for information professionals to develop or shift their career path while remaining within the discipline of information management

Source

Librarian career development. 4(1996) no.2, S.22-27

0.024002463 = product of:
  0.12001231 = sum of:
    0.12001231 = sum of:
      0.073936656 = weight(_text_:management in 3355) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.073936656 = score(doc=3355,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.51601756 = fieldWeight in 3355, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3355)
      0.04607566 = weight(_text_:22 in 3355) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04607566 = score(doc=3355,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3355, 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=3355)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Discusses the problems associated with electronic archiving and draws attention to work by the University of Pittsburgh on developing a standard for archiving electronic documents. Examines elements of effective archival and records management and considers the problems associated with archives such as backlogs and time taken to search for information. The basis of good records management lies in making responsible choices

Date

22. 2.1996 9:30:18

0.024002463 = product of:
  0.12001231 = sum of:
    0.12001231 = sum of:
      0.073936656 = weight(_text_:management in 2923) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.073936656 = score(doc=2923,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.51601756 = fieldWeight in 2923, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2923)
      0.04607566 = weight(_text_:22 in 2923) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04607566 = score(doc=2923,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2923, 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=2923)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The successful implementation of Electronic Document Management Systems (EDMS) requires a previous design based on a methodology that includes key steps as follows: capture of critical information and analysis of the current document situation: functional and/or technical options that involve the treatment of the document fonds considered; document management applications design (data, text, images, audio, video) under a functional, technical and economic focus; global and modular project defined as a strategic EDMS plan

Date

11. 2.1999 21:02:22

Footnote

Übers. des Titels: Analysis and design of electronic document management systems in large enterprises

0.021288937 = product of:
  0.10644469 = sum of:
    0.10644469 = sum of:
      0.060369022 = weight(_text_:management in 3627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.060369022 = score(doc=3627,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.42132655 = fieldWeight in 3627, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3627)
      0.04607566 = weight(_text_:22 in 3627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04607566 = score(doc=3627,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3627, 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=3627)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Examines the challenges associated with records management in an electronic environment. These include: the impact of professionalization; the explosion of information created and disseminated in electronic form; increased personal responsibility and the creation of ethical codes regulating the coduct of records managers; commitment to and recognition by society at large; and the need to redefine the skills and knowledge required to fulfil the new role of records manager

Date

15. 5.1999 20:22:49

0.020851715 = product of:
  0.10425857 = sum of:
    0.10425857 = sum of:
      0.075461276 = weight(_text_:management in 3220) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.075461276 = score(doc=3220,freq=16.0), product of:
          0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.5266582 = fieldWeight in 3220, product of:
            4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
              16.0 = termFreq=16.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3220)
      0.02879729 = weight(_text_:22 in 3220) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02879729 = score(doc=3220,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3220, 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=3220)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Die September/Oktober-Ausgabe 2009 der IWP ist eine Schwerpunktausgabe zum Records Management. Es ist interessant, dass einmal aus fachlich ganz anderer Perspektive auf diese Management- Disziplin geschaut wird. Viele Aspekte werden angesprochen: Terminologie, Rolle des Archivwesens, Interdisziplinarität, Langzeitaufbewahrung und Standardisierung. Im Artikel "Wissensorganisation und Records Management. Was ist der 'state of the art'?" steht die Wissensorganisation als Schwachstelle des Records Management zentral. Dies zu Recht: Das logische Datenmodell von DOMEA - das Gleiche gilt für GEVER und ELAK - entspricht beispielsweise nicht in allen Hinsichten der Geschäftsrealität. Daraus entstehen für die Mitarbeitenden im Arbeitsalltag öfters mehr Verständnisprobleme als sie bewältigen können oder wollen. Die systemische Unterstützung der eingesetzten EDRMS (nicht alle Produkte verdienen übrigens diesen Namen) wird dadurch geschwächt. Die Wissensorganisation genügt in vielen Fällen (noch) nicht. Das Problem liegt allerdings weniger bei der Klassifikation (Aktenplan), wie Ulrike Spree meint. Auch hier kommen Anomalien vor. Ein Ordnungssystem im Records Management umfasst mehr als nur die Klassifikation. Zudem dürfen die prinzipiellen, inhärenten Unterschiede zwischen Records Management einerseits und Wissens- und Informationsmanagement andererseits nicht vergessen gehen. Nicht die Klassifikation ist beim Records Management das zentrale Werkzeug der Informationsrepräsentation und -organisation, sondern die saubere Dossierbildung und die stringente, strukturstabile Umsetzung davon im Datenmodell. Hierauf geht die Autorin nicht ein. Ich werde aus dieser Sicht auf ihren Beitrag in der Schwerpunktausgabe reagieren.

Date

6.12.2009 17:22:17

0.020663233 = product of:
  0.103316166 = sum of:
    0.103316166 = weight(_text_:inc in 6386) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.103316166 = score(doc=6386,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2573945 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0549803 = idf(docFreq=281, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042509552 = queryNorm
        0.40139228 = fieldWeight in 6386, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0549803 = idf(docFreq=281, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6386)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Retrieval Tests sind die anerkannteste Methode, um neue Verfahren der Inhaltserschließung gegenüber traditionellen Verfahren zu rechtfertigen. Im Rahmen einer Diplomarbeit wurden zwei grundsätzlich unterschiedliche Systeme der automatischen inhaltlichen Erschließung anhand der Pressedatenbank des Verlagshauses Gruner + Jahr (G+J) getestet und evaluiert. Untersucht wurde dabei natürlichsprachliches Retrieval im Vergleich zu Booleschem Retrieval. Bei den beiden Systemen handelt es sich zum einen um Autonomy von Autonomy Inc. und DocCat, das von IBM an die Datenbankstruktur der G+J Pressedatenbank angepasst wurde. Ersteres ist ein auf natürlichsprachlichem Retrieval basierendes, probabilistisches System. DocCat demgegenüber basiert auf Booleschem Retrieval und ist ein lernendes System, das auf Grund einer intellektuell erstellten Trainingsvorlage indexiert. Methodisch geht die Evaluation vom realen Anwendungskontext der Textdokumentation von G+J aus. Die Tests werden sowohl unter statistischen wie auch qualitativen Gesichtspunkten bewertet. Ein Ergebnis der Tests ist, dass DocCat einige Mängel gegenüber der intellektuellen Inhaltserschließung aufweist, die noch behoben werden müssen, während das natürlichsprachliche Retrieval von Autonomy in diesem Rahmen und für die speziellen Anforderungen der G+J Textdokumentation so nicht einsetzbar ist

0.019876972 = product of:
  0.09938486 = sum of:
    0.09938486 = sum of:
      0.07058757 = weight(_text_:management in 1632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07058757 = score(doc=1632,freq=14.0), product of:
          0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.49264365 = fieldWeight in 1632, product of:
            3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
              14.0 = termFreq=14.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1632)
      0.02879729 = weight(_text_:22 in 1632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02879729 = score(doc=1632,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1632, 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=1632)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Purpose - This article aims to describe how people manage to integrate their use of paper and electronic documents in modern office work environments. Design/methodology/approach - An observational interview type study of 14 participants from 11 offices in eight organizations was conducted. Recorded data were analysed using a thematic analysis method. This involved reading and annotation of interview transcripts, categorizing, linking and connecting, corroborating, and producing an account of the study. Findings - The findings of the study can be categorized into four groups: the roles paper and electronic documents serve in today's offices, the ways in which these documents are managed, the problems associated with their management, and the types of fragmentation that exist in terms of their management and how these are dealt with. Practical implications - The study has identified the need for better integrated management of paper and electronic documents in present-day offices. The findings of the study have then been used to propose a set of guidelines for the development of integrated paper and electronic document management systems. Originality/value - Although similar studies of offices have been conducted in the past, almost all of these studies are prior to the widespread use of mobile and network-based shared technologies in office environments. Furthermore, previous studies have generally failed to identify and propose guidelines for integration of paper and electronic document management systems.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

Source

Aslib journal of information management. 66(2014) no.2, S.134-155

0.01862782 = product of:
  0.0931391 = sum of:
    0.0931391 = sum of:
      0.052822895 = weight(_text_:management in 758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.052822895 = score(doc=758,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.36866072 = fieldWeight in 758, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=758)
      0.0403162 = weight(_text_:22 in 758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0403162 = score(doc=758,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 758, 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=758)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Reports results of the MARS project, conducted at Illinois University, to bring together researchers in the fields of computer vision, compression, information management and database systems with the goal of developing an effective multimedia database management system. Describes the first step, involving the design and implementation of an image retrieval system incorporating novel approaches to image segmentation, representation, browsing and information retrieval supported by the developed system. Points to future directions for the MARS project

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05

0.0177526 = product of:
  0.088763006 = sum of:
    0.088763006 = sum of:
      0.042687345 = weight(_text_:management in 814) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042687345 = score(doc=814,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.29792285 = fieldWeight in 814, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=814)
      0.04607566 = weight(_text_:22 in 814) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04607566 = score(doc=814,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 814, 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=814)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Electronic document management systems are a collection of 3 complementary technologies: the repository, the workflow engine and the searching-and-indexing technology. The document repository stores, controls and manages documents. Workflow can eliminate the dead time a document spends in transition between works and integrates with the repository and electronic mail system. Search and indexing technology enables more efficient searching than standard full text technologies by configuring searches to specific attributes. Discusses how the technologies can be combined to manage a WWW site and offers advice on choosing an appropriate solution

Source

Byte. 22(1997) no.5, S.75-76,78,80

0.016873656 = product of:
  0.08436828 = sum of:
    0.08436828 = product of:
      0.16873656 = sum of:
        0.16873656 = weight(_text_:management in 4560) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.16873656 = score(doc=4560,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            1.1776435 = fieldWeight in 4560, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4560)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

There is confusion about the conceptual origins of records management. It is often wrongly associated with archival management. Records management however should be associated with management as its core paradigm is that of information management. Traces the rise of management and the emergence of management information, prior to the 2nd World War

Source

Records management quarterly. 29(1995) no.4, S.68-73

0.015533525 = product of:
  0.077667624 = sum of:
    0.077667624 = sum of:
      0.037351426 = weight(_text_:management in 1788) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.037351426 = score(doc=1788,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.2606825 = fieldWeight in 1788, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1788)
      0.0403162 = weight(_text_:22 in 1788) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0403162 = score(doc=1788,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14886121 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.042509552 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1788, 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=1788)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Zuerst erkannt haben es Versicherungen, Landesbausparkassen, Verlage wie Gruner&Jahr sowie das europäische Patentamt. Bevor das eigene Unternehmen unter der Flut von Informationen zu ersticken droht, müssen die riesigen Papierberge abgetragen und die Verwaltung entschlackt werden. Die Zauberformel dafür: Dokumenten-Management-Systeme (DMS). Neue elektronische Speicher- und Archivierungssysteme bieten dem Unternehmer viele Vorteile: Sie sparen Kosten, denken den Verwaltungsaufwand und steigern dadurch die Leistung der Firma. Inzwischen ist DMS nicht nur für die Großen ein Thema: Freiberufler, Rechtsanwälte, Wirtschaftsprüfer, Steuerberater und Arztpraxen suchen ebenfalls einen Ausweg aus dem Papierchaos. Denn bereits in 2 Jahren, so die düstere Aussage amerikanischer Forscher, werden Unternehmen mit papiergebundenen Verwaltungen ums geschäftliche Überleben kämpfen. In Westeuropa steht DMS dagaben noch in den Anfängen: bis 1998 - so die Experten - werden aber die Nachfrage nach DMS-Lösungen auf rund 8 Milliarden steigen

Source

Facts: Testmagazin für die Büro- & Kommunikationswelt. 1995, H.5, S.22-34

0.014317772 = product of:
  0.07158886 = sum of:
    0.07158886 = product of:
      0.14317772 = sum of:
        0.14317772 = weight(_text_:management in 7288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14317772 = score(doc=7288,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.14328322 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042509552 = queryNorm
            0.99926364 = fieldWeight in 7288, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=7288)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Defines the nature of electronic records management. Gives a background to records management in the USA, and details the phrases of electronic records management: creation, maintenance, retention, and disposition

Source

Records management quarterly. 30(1996) no.1, S.38-42