manifesto for a standard on meaningful representation of knowledge

Manifesto for a Standard on Meaningful Representations of Knowledge in Social Knowledge Management Environments

Bick, M., Hetmank, L., Kruse, P., Maier, R., Pawlowski, J.M.,

Peinl, R., Schoop, E., Seeber, I., Thalmann, S

1

Licensing: Creative Commons

You are free:

to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work

to Remix — to adapt the work

Under the following conditions:

Attribution. You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).

Noncommercial. You may not use this work for commercial purposes.

Share Alike. If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one.

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/

2








Current Team

3

Knowledge Management going social…

6

Sou

rce: B.D

. Solis: h

ttp://w

ww

.sortin

gtho

ugh

ts.de/b

log/w

p-

con

tent/u

plo

ads/2

00

8/1

2/2

73

54

01

17

5_fcd

cd0

da0

3.jp

g

The challenges

Knowledge management trends

Connecting human and technology orientation

From document/repository orientation to distributed resources and activities

Social software as a central concept for connecting resources and activities

How do we represent knowledge and connect activities, resources and people?

7

Current standardization efforts

Technical standards (document formats, metadata) Dublin Core

Learning Object Metadata (LOM)

Business Process Model Notation (BPMN)

IMS Learning Design Specification

Contextualized attention metadata (CAM)

RDF, OWL

OOXML, PDF, ODF

Human-oriented standards (guidelines and good practices)

9

Activity Stream

Activity Streams allow applications to publish a live stream of a persons’ working, learning (or social) activities by aggregators that serialize items into a sequence of posts, making actions visible to other users of the service.

Motivation

participants better understand boundaries of their actions

groups better manage & coordinate activities

people decide with whom to collaborate

attracts attention and signals

enhances knowledge sharing, asking & answering questions, solving problems

enhances mechanisms to demonstrate competences

11

(Olson et al., 2006)

Active Documents

An electronic document which includes data as well as metadata and application logic. Alternatively, an active document can be directly connected with the application logic.

Metadata and application logic will be transferred with the active document and be able to activate, control and execute functionalities. [Trög07]

12

Standard system enviroment

Passive

Document

Specific system environment interpreting metadata and application logic

Sort of document

Requirements regarding system

environment

Transformation characteristic

Integration of metadata

Enriched

Document

Ability to react on an event

Reactive

Document

Ability to initiate and control functions

Active

Document

Ability to take decisions autonomously

Proactive

Document

<creator>Muster</creator><date>11-01-2006</date>



Specific system environment

using autoactivation mode


[Trög07]

Current findings

Knowledge management changes towards distributed, social, interactive environments

Current standards do not allow appropriate representation of social KM

E.g. activities

New ways of knowledge representations are needed (and approaches are available)

13

The Manifesto

New ways of knowledge representation

Key aspects Represent activities and interactions

Represent context: in which environment do knowledge activities happen?

Allow bundling, merging and connecting resources, activities and people

Develop a standard for KM (systems) to enable interoperability and re-use

A basis for discussion, discourse, community building!

14

Towards knowledge containers

KAS1

reference KA – Knowledge Activity A – Action KT – Knowledge Trace KO – Knowledge Object KB – Knowledge Bundle KC – Knowledge Container KAS – KA Stream KC

KO KO

A KB KB

KB

A

A

KAS2

KO KO

A A

KO

A A

KA1 KA2

A

Aspects of contextual information enriched knowledge containers

17

Predictions and Recommendations

1. Acknowledge KM as a social activity

• gap between technology and human orientation bridged by SSW and SM

• trend acknowledged by research community and practitioners.

2. Focus the active, not the passive

• we need a variety of ways to represent knowledge

• the focus should shift from document-oriented to an activity-oriented view to better capture the dynamic process.

3. Context will be the key factor to understand KM

• context rarely analyzed or represented in both, research and standardization communities, thus lack of transferability of results

• adequate specifications needed to represent context.

4. Stop using outdated frameworks

• standards in KM like Dublin Core do not take technological advances into account

• widely agreed conceptual KM framework needed considering social media as source for contextual metadata.

18

Predictions and Recommendations (con’t)

5. Focus on specifications and standards

• KM community has ignored standards for decades.

• specifications and standards are important when designing and experimenting with innovative systems.

6. Form an enterprise-research alliance for standards

• consensus of all stakeholders needed, in particular researchers and enterprises.

• a balanced community needs to be formed from the very beginning.

7. Stand on the shoulders of giants

• KM community has specific characteristics, but standards do not need to be created from scratch.

• build on existing base and similar standards already successful in use.

8. Create standards now

• KM and SSW are mature enough that we understand the key success factors.

• KM community needs to create standards as an agreement in the community for competitive innovative and interoperable solutions

19

Summary

We need new ways of representing knowledge management in standards

Key aspect: adding context and activities

Steps

Find (further) appropriate approaches, standards and alternatives

Collaborate with standardization bodies

Discuss, test, improve!

20

Contact Information JYU

Prof. Dr. Markus Bick [email protected]

Prof. Dr. Ronald Maier [email protected]

Prof. Dr. Jan M. Pawlowski [email protected]

Prof. Dr. Rene Peinl [email protected]

Prof. Dr. Eric Schoop [email protected]

21