Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects
Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects
Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects
Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects
Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects
Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects
Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects
Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects
Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects
Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects
Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects
Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects
Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects
Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects
Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects
Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects
Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects
Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects
Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects
Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects

1,322

Published on

This work in progress presents an approach to compare patterns of communication and knowledge organization in cultural and engineering science projects under the leading point of media use. The goal …

This work in progress presents an approach to compare patterns of communication and knowledge organization in cultural and engineering science projects under the leading point of media use. The goal of the underlying project is to gain a better understanding on similarities and di erences in both areas and to develop more appropriate information system support for both areas. Central to the comparative analysis approach is a process knowledge repository which was successfully used in two case studies about real world information systems.

Published in: Technology, Education, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,322
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Knowledge Management Cultures: A Comparison of Engineering and Cultural Science Projects - Position Paper - Ralf Klamma, Matthias Jarke Lehrstuhl fur Informatik V, RWTH Aachen D-52056 Aachen, Ahornstr. 55, Germany Tel.: +49 +241 80-21534, Fax.: +49 +241 8888-321 email: fklammajjarkeg@informatik.rwth-aachen.de Abstract: This work in progress presents an approach to compare patterns of com- munication and knowledge organization in cultural and engineering science projects under the leading point of media use. The goal of the underlying project is to gain a better un- derstanding on similarities and di erences in both areas and to develop more appropriate information system support for both areas. Central to the comparative analysis approach is a process knowledge repository which was successfully used in two case studies about real world information systems. 1 Introduction Knowledge management is becoming a fashion in many organizations. The review of cur- rent literature, e.g. (Stein and Zwass, 1995), (Borgho and Pareschi, 1998), (Burgel, 1998), (Burstein et al., 1997), (Croasdell et al., 1997), (Wijnhoven, 1998), (Wargitsch et al., 1998) reveals an ever growing number of IS approaches for applying knowledge management in di erent organizational contexts such as managing expertise. This entails the danger to drown in the overwhelming sea of knowledge. Antagonizing this danger means to ask the right questions. What is really new? What is really useful? What is really sustainable in the long run? 1
  • 2. There is a long tradition of expertise management in scholarly communication. Since centuries scholars communicate in quite stable processes with an observable success for at least a bigger part of modern civilisation. An incising change process had been intro- duced by the invention of letter press in 1445 by Gutenberg which had been applied by scholars very soon. Another incising change process is maybe the invention of networked information systems. Again, these processes will change due to introduction of new media resulting in new patterns of communication and knowledge organization. We are able to study these changes just as they are happening and to give appropriate information sys- tem support. But again, we meet the following questions. Are their sustainable impacts on communication and knowledge organization introduced by new ways of working? If networked systems enable scholars to collaborate are they willing to do so? It is possible for them to resist? How should information system support be organized? Electronify slip boxes or introduce metaphors like organizational memory borrowed from other sciences? How to compare them to metaphors like cultural memory? Brie y stated, together with linguists, scientists from the humanities, historians, psy- chologists we as computer scientists work in the recently started cultural collaborative re- search center FK 427 Media and Cultural Communication" (http://www.uni-koeln.de/in- ter-fak/fk-427/) situated in Cologne. The center consists of 13 subprojects with about 60 researchers involved. In our project we want to research the change processes in the cul- tural science introduced by new media and to design the necessary and wished changes in a sustainable way. At the end we hope to learn from the experiences gained in the inter- disciplinary project to reimplement them in our understanding of information systems use in organizations. In this paper we give a digest of our project in section 2 and then introduce the process knowledge repository which is essential for our comparative analysis approach of existing information system's use in cultural and engineering sciences in section 3. The repository is based on a web-based work ow and knowledge management system GRAECULUS we developed for an engineering company in 1998. We use the extended repository to perform case studies on real world information systems use. Two of them are described in section 4. 2
  • 3. 2 Project Overview We do not want to stress on de nitions of media, communication, or knowledge organi- zation here, cf. e.g (McLuhan, 1970), (Krippendorf, 1975), (Luhmann, 1997), (Koch and Kramer, 1997), (Kramer, 1998), (Krebs, 1998), but sketch our research approach to study the impacts of networked multi media information systems (IS) on patterns of coopera- tion and knowledge organization in cultural science projects. A graphical synopsis of the project is given in gure 1. We use our IS Analysis Methodology which is a mixture of group-oriented scenario and formal modelling and analysing techniques, developed in cooperative (mechanical and business) engineering projects, e.g. FOQUS (Klamma and Jarke, 1998), AdCo (Jarke and Kethers, 1999), and CapeOpen (Jarke et al., 1999), to compare informal communication, archive or database usage, and work ow support in selected cultural and engineering science projects under the leading point of media use. Our hypothesis is the following. Empirical studies of real world information systems in both areas enable us to identify pattern of communication and knowledge organization. Such patterns are observable pieces of pro- cesses which are decontextualizable and recontextualizable in analogy to design patterns (Gamma et al., 1994 Ackerman and Halverson, 1999). Communicational patterns could include noise reduction in mailing lists by moderators, examples for knowledge organiza- tion patterns are the creation and use of a project glossary. We use these patterns to elicit future requirements and necessary cooperative metaphors for information systems. In se- lected projects we then implement prototypes built from these requirements and metaphors to analyze the impacts and reiterate the cycle. Our expectations are twofold. First, we want to support scholarly communication processes in cultural sciences. Second, we want to learn by observing the processes to improve and generalize our own IS Methodology. In the next section we present our process knowledge repository which is central for the storage and analysis of patterns of communication and knowledge organization in real world projects situated both in cultural science and engineering contexts. 3 The Process Knowledge Repository The rst question to answer is: why to build up a process knowledge repository? Brie y, this enables us to perform a model-based analysis of di erent kind of processes in existing information systems to 3
  • 4. IS Analysis General IS Methodology Methodology Media Specific Cultural Comparison Engineering Science • Informal Communication Science Projects • Archive / Database Projects • Workflow Support Cultural Science Support 1. Patterns of information exchange and knowledge organisation 2. Future Requirements/ Cooperation Methaphors 3. Impact Analysis Figure 1: Overview over research approach describe and relate concepts of communication, coordination, and knowledge organi- zation, compare and extract use of these concepts in di erent contexts, identify patterns of communication and knowledge organization, and study common and distinct features of IS usage. The second question to answer is: how to build up such a process knowledge base? We decided to build the core of the process knowledge repository from an operational work ow system called GRAECULUS (Klamma et al., 1999). The strategy was pre- ferred because the system already interrelates patterns of knowledge organization which we call mnemonic processes and patterns of communication and coordination which we call business processes. To interrelate the mnemonic processes with the business processes, we construct a meta model which emphasises the coherence between the business process models and the mnemonic processes. The GRAECULUS system itself is a servlet engine based on a relational database. Every time an interaction is performed a new web page will be generated by GRAECULUS visualizing information contained in the database and of- fering new possibilities of interaction based on explicitly modelled business and mnemonic processes. 4
  • 5. The meta model is shown in gure 2, using a graphical presentation which is based on an extended entity-relationship approach, the Telos language (Mylopoulos et al., 1990). The modelling process has been performed with the ConceptBase system (Jarke et al., 1995). Each icon represents a concept of the meta model. Attribute links between concepts are shown as arrows labeled by an attribute name. Instance links are arrows marked by the label in while isA-links are presented as bold arrows. Figure 2: Organizational Memory Meta Model (ConceptBase Window Dump) The most important concepts of the meta model are summarized in the next three subsections. 3.1 Business Processes are Objects of the Organizational Mem- ory Organizational activities contain important knowledge. Business processes will be modelled by business process models expressed in a language chosen by the agents. Since we used a 5
  • 6. meta model approach, the use of di erent business process modelling languages which can be interrelated by means of mnemonic processes and meta modelling techniques, is possible. For GRAECULUS we use the language described in (Klamma et al., 1998) which has been developed and validated in an improvement management context (Klamma and Jarke, 1998). For the sake of brevity we here describe the concepts only in short. Process. This concept describes business processes performed by agents. Business pro- cesses can be re ned. Agent. This concept characterizes humans or groups of humans performing a business process. Tool. The tool concept describes technologies supporting the agents performing their pro- cesses. There is a clear distinction between tools and additional resources which belong to the object concept. Object. In a business process enactment environment the object concept describes arti- facts consumed, manipulated or produced in business processes. A process-based organizational memory system which supplies a knowledge-based sup- port to the company's activities seems to be appropriate to enhance the primary objective - the competitive performance - of a company. Hence, the mnemonic processes have to deal with the activities of the company. As a consequence, the business processes get the role of objects, which will be produced and consumed by the mnemonic processes (cf. gure 3). 3.2 Knowledge Agents are involved in any kind of Processes Due to both previous explications, it is obvious that knowledge agents are not only involved in mnemonic processes but also in business processes. In reference with mnemonic processes we have to re ne the concept of agent. Therefore, we distinguish the following re ned concepts. Knowledge Creator. New knowledge is obtained through conversion of explicit and im- plicit knowledge (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995). In knowledge-intensive enterprises most of the employees frequently create new knowledge. To make this knowledge useful for the company's goals, the knowledge creator must be able to externalize and share this knowledge. Within the organizational memory model the knowledge 6
  • 7. Figure 3: Business Processes are Objects of the Organisational Memory (ConceptBase Window Dump) creator performs the acquisition of new knowledge, so this concept refers to knowledge acquisition. Knowledge User. People who are looking for some knowledge - e.g. people, searching for an answer to an emerging question - are called knowledge users. Knowledge users perform knowledge search and retrieval processes within the organizational mem- ory model and eventually become experts through their intensive use of processes, objects, and tools. Expert. Experts are people who hold a certain part of knowledge relevant for the company. These people maintain an important part of the organizational memory because they hold implicit knowledge, di cult to externalize and in so far can hardly be supported directly by computer supported tools for knowledge management. Knowledge Administrator. The knowledge administrator supervises the organizational memory system. For knowledge can get con icting or invalid over time, it is necessary 7
  • 8. to do so. He can explicitly select processes, objects, tools and agents for maintenance processes like aging and archiving. Monitoring processes can also be performed by the organizational memory system itself, e.g. for assigning expert roles to agents (knowledge maintenance ). Agents use the knowledge repository (OMSRepository ) as an essential tool. Through the linkage of relevant information to the business processes, knowledge concerning the pro- cesses is stored permanently in this knowledge repository. Furthermore, the modelling ap- proach guarantees a documentation of processes for further use, e.g. in personnel training. The knowledge repository is not necessarily a central server but could be also a federated database spread all over the organization. From a conceptual modelling view these three properties are modelled as follows. The isA-link between BusinessProcessModel and OMSObject describes that business processes are objects of the organizational memory. Due to this relation the organizational memory meta model can interact with business processes. The fact that mnemonic processes are also considered as business processes is expressed through the isA link between the concepts MnemonicProcess and OMSObject. Through these properties the agents can operate as knowledge agents on business processes and mnemonic processes in the same manner. The mnemonic processes can use knowledge, which is gained through the models of the business processes and the mnemonic processes as well. This implies not only the ability to improve business processes but also the ability to improve mnemonic processes. 3.3 Mnemonic Processes are Business Processes The mnemonic processes establish an important determination for successful knowledge management because someone is unable to make use of stored knowledge without them. Therefore, these processes are a central part in GRAECULUS. As described in (Acker- man and Mandel, 1995) the organizational memory system is not only a repository but has to be embedded in the processes and tasks of the organization. Even though mnemonic processes have more long-term characteristics than short-term business processes, it is im- portant to emphasize that mnemonic processes are activities of the company as well. So, these activities have to be supported by GRAECULUS just as business processes. There- fore, it is insightful to model them in the same manner as business processes. We have reviewed current organizational memory research literature (Schlaphof, 1998), extracted a set of mnemonic processes mentioned in almost every paper (marked bold in 8
  • 9. table 1) and modelled them as processes knowledge creation (acquisition), knowledge usage (search & retrieval), and knowledge maintenance (including retention) proposed by Stein and Zwass (Stein and Zwass, 1995). Literature Mnemonic processes (Stein and Zwass, 1995) Acquisition, Search, Retrieval, Retention, Maintenance (Ramesh, 1997) Acquisition, Retrieval, Retention, Development, Reuse (Morrison, 1997) Acquisition, Search, Retrieval, Retention (Wijnhoven, 1998) Acquisition, Search, Retrieval, Retention, Dissemination (Burstein et al., 1998) Acquisition, Retrieval, Retention, Maintenance, Learning Table 1: Mnemonic Processes mentioned in Literature We than reviewed the literature again to nd specializations of these processes which are listed in the next list grouped by their generalizations. Creation processes This process points out the development and incorporation of new knowledge. Knowl- edge is a dynamic item and hence, through creation of new knowledge the organi- zational memory system can get updated. According to Morrison (Morrison, 1997) mnemonic processes for knowledge creation include archival, directed or automatic acquisition. Archival acquisition Knowledge agents place new knowledge in the organizational memory system by means of archival acquisition processes. Directed acquisition These processes are performed by the knowledge agents con- tacted by another agent, e.g. by an agent who had performed an unsuccessful query. Automatic acquisition Such processes periodically send queries to knowledge ag- ents to extend the knowledge stock. Usage processes The use of existing knowledge is signi cant for an e ective company's performance in changing environments. The quality of decisions and problem solutions is in uenced by abilities to search and retrieve (Stein, 1995). Hence it is important to provide e ective means to access knowledge directly through suitable storage structures. Morrison (Morrison, 1997) describes techniques like asking an expert", querying, ltering, guided exploration, subscriptions, and navigation as e ective strategies in 9
  • 10. di erent usage contexts. Work ow-based systems introduced the process of task- speci c pushing of information (Ackerman and Mandel, 1995 Klamma et al., 1998). O'Leary (O'Leary, 1998) adds the idea of connecting people and knowledge to the idea of knowledge conversion modes introduced by Nonaka and Takeuchi (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995). In table 2 we assign the mnemonic processes related to search & retrieval to the knowledge ows described by O'Leary. Knowledge ow . . . People . . . Knowledge People to . . . Socialization Externalization Asking an Expert Query Filtering Guided Exploration Knowledge to . . . Internalization Combination Subscription Navigation Task speci c Pushing Table 2: Knowledge Conversion & Connecting Strategies (adapted from (O'Leary, 1998)) Asking an Expert Queries are routed to people believed to be expert in a certain subject area. Query Queries are processes to externalize knowledge speci c to certain query at- tributes. Guided Exploration Such processes are used to perform knowledge search sup- ported by an information broker (search expert), eventually a software agent. Filtering Filtering is a process used to restrict the amount of knowledge returned from a query, e.g according to certain criteria which can be xed arbitrary or be based on experience. Navigation Navigation processes connect knowledge with knowledge such building up knowledge networks which can be described by means of links. Subscription Subscriptions are periodically sent knowledge objects for a certain agent. The agent can determine frequency, subject area and other parameters. Task speci c pushing If an organizational memory is organized by means of pro- cesses or task, the task knowledge can be used to route the knowledge needed by a special task. 10
  • 11. Maintenance processes To avoid inconsistency of retained knowledge, the maintenance of knowledge is neces- sary. That includes proper integration of new knowledge to facilitate future retrieval, and the handling of aged knowledge (validation and reorganization) in order to avoid contradictory information. Integration Integrative functions have to be performed to organize a meaningful introduction of new knowledge objects, e.g. rebuilding the index. Aging Knowledge objects have to be controlled for their usefulness in the organiza- tional memory system. Also the routines for handling aged knowledge have to be predetermined. Reorganization Reorganization of the knowledge objects is a normal process in a learning organization since insights are applied by remodelling the processes. Validation Recognition of meaningfulness of knowledge objects and routines for handling unmeaningful knowledge objects. 3.4 An Application: Knowledge Maps It is really important for organizations to know who has which knowledge because trans- parency of knowledge is increased by recognizing de cits in certain areas or assign com- petences to certain tasks. Even if an employee has left an organization, it is important to realize how much knowledge has left also. An visualization of these facts is possible through use of so called knowledge maps. Existing approaches include knowledge topogra- phies, geographic information systems, knowledge matrices, and knowledge source maps cf. e.g. (Scheer, 1998 Burgel, 1998). However, creation and management of such knowledge maps are costly. GRAECULUS creates and manages such maps automatically by storing and analysing traces of its use. Every time people are using the functionalities of the system, the models in the database are instantiated. By querying the tables a knowledge pro le of an employee will be generated online as a new web page. In extreme, such pro les include all the business processes and mnemonic processes employees have performed but the queries can be parameterized to cut down result sizes of the queries. It is possible to query if an employee have accessed objects more than 10 times which can be determined as a criterion to be an expert for those objects. 11
  • 12. 4 Case Studies We performed the case studies to test the following hypotheses. The proposed model has analytic capabilities. Since the model was originally built for an operational task-based organizational memory system we have to investigate if the processes de ned are identi able in other networked information systems. Can we externalize mnemonic and business processes in real world applications? Can we classify them in our meta model? The proposed model allow comparisons of project work supported by networked information systems. Can we identify patterns of communication and knowledge organization in projects with di erent structure and di erent kind of information system support? Are the patterns comparable? We present two of our case studies here, one from cultural sciences and the other one from engineering sciences. We choose the PhilNet project (http://www.sozialwiss.uni- hamburg.de/phil/ag/internet.html) for the following reasons. First, it is an open project driven mainly by undergraduates or graduates in philosophy at the University of Hamburg. Second, PhilNet is open to the public. Third, PhilNet is open ended. The PhilNet project consists of four major sub projects: 1. MINERVA - an open electronic archive for philosophical texts. 2. ARIADNE - a search engine for web sites with content related to philosophy 3. PhilJobs - a collection of job o ers related to philosophy world wide. 4. PhilDir - a directory of links to web sites collected by a editorial committee. The second project is called CapeOpen (Computer Aided Process Engineering - Open Interfaces to Next Generation Process Simulation Tools), a collaborative BRITE-EURAM research e ort of several European research sites (IMTP Toulouse, RWTH Aachen, and Imperial College London), major companies of the petrochemical branch (Bayer, BASF, ELF, Dupont, BP, and ICI), and software companies (AspenTech, SimSci, Hyprotech, and QuantiSci). The aim of the project is the de nition of open interfaces for process simulators for chemical plants. 12
  • 13. 4.1 Case Study Design To perform the case studies in every study three people were involved: an analyst, an advanced user and a supervisor. 1. The analyst used and analyzed the processes of the information systems to perform following steps (not necessarily in that order) (a) Identi cation of tools. (b) Identi cation of knowledge agents or business process performers. (c) Identi cation of knowledge or business objects. (d) Identi cation of mnemonic processes or business processes. 2. The analyst documented and modelled the results in the process knowledge repos- itory. If clari cation was needed the analyst talked to the advanced user or the supervisor. 3. At the end of the case study the analyst and the supervisor performed unstructured interviews with the advanced user to gather additional background information. 4. The supervisor documented the case study. 4.2 PhilNet We concentrate on the MINERVA open text archive but results hold for all subprojects in the PhilNet project. The models shown in the next two gures are not complete at all but views of the ConceptBase GraphBrowser. MINERVA (cf. gure 4) was modelled as PublicMemory which is a specialization of concept (OMSRepository ). An anonymous user of PhilNet is modelled as concept MINERVA Use r, a specialization of KnowledgeUser and KnowledgeCreator. In fact, the user can use the archive to create new knowledge or use existing knowledge. The system present di erent search and retrieval functionalities to the user which are documented as MINERVA AuthorSearch, MINERVA QuickSearch, and MINERVA ExtendedSearch. We classi ed these processes as navigational processes because the object MINERVA BibliographicDirectory is presented which is collection of hyperlinks to texts which are downloaded by process MINERVA TextDownload. MINERVA Extended- Search provides additional criteria to lter search results. Concept PrivateMemory, instan- tiation of PersonalMemory is a collection of electronic documents (possibly one) which are published by mnemonic processes MINERVA TextRegistration and MINERVA TextUpdate 13
  • 14. (for existing documents). We plan to extend the process knowledge repository for publica- tion processes to research those kind of processes. The mnemonic process MINERVA News- Subscription is an instantiation of Subscription. Information about new documents are sent to users by a mailing list automatically. Figure 4: Mnemonic Processes in MINERVA (ConceptBase Window Dump) Although, we presented only one subproject here, we identi ed the use of mnemonic processes in all parts of the project. We have been able to classify them in our meta model. The advanced user stated that user management is done autonomously by the users. This is a standard in management of email lists. Exceptional is the openness of the MINERVA archive. Users are not allowed to modify or delete documents not belonging to themselves. That is the only restriction known by the advanced user. We did not research write and publication processes in this study but plan to do so. Due to the advanced user informal communication is organized by mailing lists, news sub- scriptions and email. One of the mailing lists has changed the purpose from administrative to informational even though the moderators try to turn round the purpose again. Finally, 14
  • 15. a new list was installed by knowledge administrators. From a technical point of view, the PhilNet project is a collection of simple Internet technologies like frame oriented web pages, mailing lists, link collections connected and controlled by cgi scripts and HTML pages. 4.3 CapeOpen The CapeOpen project is using the BSCW system (Bentley et al., 1997) from GMD (Ger- man National Research Center for Computer Science). The BSCW system is a virtual group working place structured by virtual folders. The system allows the storage and retrieval of documents with di erent formats, links to web sites, and annotations which together can be versioned. It also o ers some functionalities for organizing group meetings and managing users. In release 3.1 of the system a version control system is integrated to trace changes of documents. We identi ed the knowledge objects Article, Document, Link, Meeting and Folder, the knowledge agent BSCW Member and the system's mnemonic processes BSCW Search, Archive, Copy, Cut, Delete, CatchUp, AddArticle, AddDoc, AddURL und AddFolder as shown in gure 5. The mnemonic process are used by the agent BSCW Member to work on the project memory BSCW CAPE OPEN Workspace. Most of the concepts are self- explanatory. Mnemonic process Archive is an instantiation of concept Maintenance be- cause the selected objects are than zipped in a bigger le which is a kind of reorganization. AddArticle is an example for an archival acquisition process. So, we modelled it as an instantiation of concept ArchivalAcquisition. The CapeOpen project use the mnemonic processes of the BSCW technology contin- uously. These processes could be identi ed, classi ed and documented in the process knowledge repository. Besides the mnemonic processes we could identify the business pro- cesses user and meeting management (AddMeeting and AddFolder in gure 5). We have been able to identify a relationships between AddMeeting and the mnemonic processes mentioned above since Meeting is a knowledge object. The project members used the ver- sion control system hardly ever. The interview with the advanced user disclosed that, informal communication was orga- nized by using sporadic physical project meetings, email and shared phone meetings which are implied by the physical distribution of project members all over Europe and limited travel budgets. Especially, the BSCW system was used for the exchange and storage of documents relevant for the project. Cooperation support o ered by system's functionality was not used that much. The advanced user spotted two reasons for that fact. First, local connections to the system have been very slow in some European regions. Second, many 15
  • 16. users are not experienced enough to work with Internet technologies. 4.4 Preliminary Conclusions The case studies have the following main results: 1. The operational approach is usable to build up an analytic process knowledge repos- itory. Mmenonic processes have been identi ed in both projects and modelled in the knowl- edge repository. Furthermore, these processes could be classi ed in the proposed meta model. We interpret this as an indication for the con rmation of our hypothe- sis. Naturally, the subtle interplay of meta model construction and analysis process has to be researched further. 2. There are similarities and di erences in the project contexts. In this phase of the projects both similarites and di erences can only be explained on a very abstract level but hopefully detailed analyses of these and other projects will reveal more precise patterns. Besides the fact that both projects are using a notion of mnemonic processes there are similarities in switching media channels for certain tasks. While BSCW system used in CapeOpen was intended as a cooperation platform it was used as an archive. Instead, project members use traditional media to communicate directly with each other. The slowness of BSCW is the main reason for that fact. MINERVA is an archive but without a project speci c structure like o ered by the BSCW system in CapeOpen. To highlighting some di erences we mention rst, that the engineering project uses business process to manage users and meeting. It has a xed deadline and a certain amount of products (standards) to produce. Since, PhilNet has neither an explicit goal nor a deadline it is a virtual meeting point for people interested in exchanging documents or communicating via mailing lists. Second, every project uses a di erent set of media. While CapeOpen also uses synchronous media like physical meetings or telephone conferences, communication in PhilNet is totally asynchronous. 3. Studying information systems functionalities helps to structure a more detailed in- vestigation. The analysis and documentation is a preparative step to structure interviews, ques- tionnaires, site visits or quantitative tools. Interviews in the studies have been helpful 16
  • 17. to get an idea about the dynamic use of information systems by the projects. So, we are more able to ask the right questions now. Hitherto, the administrative perspec- tive of knowledge management play an integral part in the use of existing knowledge. We will use the knowledge base facilities of ConceptBase to prepare questionnaires and interview sheets from the repository data automatically. In this phase of the project we introduced in this paper there are more questions than answers for us. Starting with business processes to analyze scholarly communication and knowledge organization seems to be amazing on the rst look, but it is inspiring for both sides in an interdisciplinary project. Inside and outside the collaborative research center we collaborate with many project in the cultural sciences and the humanities. Among others we like to mention hypertextalization of the babylonic talmud together with judaists. new database requirements for storing, retaining and presenting modern performative art and for large pictural databases together with historians of art. historic review of scholarly communication from 16th century to our days together with historians and philologists. The case studies are rst steps to prepare site visits later on in 1999. Detailed analyses of the projects shall meet in an extended multi media process knowledge repository for requirements analysis. Multi media support is necessary to trace models back to real world scenes. Impact analysis of newly built information systems concludes then the iterative learning cycle. In a second project phase we want to study mass communication processes like public debates or the publishing process of an encyclopedia. References Ackerman, M. S. and Halverson, C. (1999). Organizational memory: Processes, boundary objects, and trajectories. In Proceedings of the 32st Annual Hawai'i International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-31), Los Alamitos, CA. IEEE Computer Society Press. Ackerman, M. S. and Mandel, E. (1995). Memory in the small: An application to provide task-based orga- nizational memory for a scienti c community. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual Hawai'i International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-28), pages 323{332. Bentley, R., Appelt, W., Busbach, U., Hinrichs, E., Kerr, D., Sikkel, K., Trevor, J., and Wotzel, G. (1997). Basic support for cooperative work on the world wide web. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 6(46):827 { 846. 17
  • 18. Borgho , U. M. and Pareschi, R., editors (1998). Information Technology for Knowledge Management. Springer-Verlag, Berlin et al. Burgel, H. D., editor (1998). Wissensmanagement: Schritte zum intelligenten Unternehmen. Springer- Verlag, Berlin et al. Burstein, F., Linger, H., Stein, E., and Jennex, M. (1998). Researching organisational memory systems. In Presentation at the 31st Annual Hawai'i International Conference on System Sciences, Task Force on Organizational Memory (HICSS-31). Burstein, F., Linger, H., Zaslavsky, A., and Crofts, N. (1997). Towards an information systems framework for dynamic organisational memory. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Hawai'i International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-30), Los Alamitos, CA. IEEE Computer Society Press. Croasdell, D., Paradice, D., and Courtney, J. (1997). Using adaptive hypermedia to support organizational memory and learning. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Hawai'i International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-30), Los Alamitos, CA. IEEE Computer Society Press. Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R., and John, V. (1994). Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object- Oriented Software. Professional Computing. Addison-Wesley, Reading. Jarke, M., Becks, A., Koller, J., Tresp, C., and Braunschweig, B. (1999). Designing Standards for Open Simulation Environments in the Chemical Industries: A Computer-Supported Use-Case Approach. In Fairban, A., Jones, C., Kowalski, C., and Robson, P., editors, Proceedings of the Ninth Annual In- ternational Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE'99): Systems Engineering: Sharing the Future (Brighton, England), 6-11 June, volume I, pages 69 { 76. Ascent Logic Coporation. Jarke, M., Gallersdorfer, R., Jeusfeld, M., Staudt, M., and Eherer, S. (1995). ConceptBase - a deductive object base manager for meta data management. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems, 4(2):157 { 192. Jarke, M. and Kethers, S. (1999). Competence in regional cooperation: problems and modelling techniques (In German). Wirtschaftsinformatik, 41(4). Klamma, R. and Jarke, M. (1998). Driving the organizational learning cycle: The case of computer- aided failure management. In Baets, W. R. J., editor, Proceedings of the 6th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS'98), Aix-En-Provence, France, volume 1, pages 378 { 392, Granada. Euro-Arab Management School. Klamma, R., Jarke, M., and Schlaphof, S. (1999). Rapid knowledge deployment: Interrelating mnemonic functions and business processes in a web-based work ow environment. In submitted to ICIS'99. Klamma, R., Peters, P., and Jarke, M. (1998). Work ow support for failure management in federated organizations. In Blanning, R. W. and King, D. R., editors, Proceedings of the 31st Hawai'i Conference on System Sciences, volume IV, pages 302 { 311. IEEE Computer Society Press. Koch, P. and Kramer, S., editors (1997). Schrift, Medien, Kognition - Uber die Exterioritat des Geistes. Number 19 in Probleme der Semiotik. Staufenberg Verlag, Tubingen. Kramer, S., editor (1998). Medien, Computer, Realitat - Wirklichkeitsvorstellungen und Neue Medien. Number 1379 in stw. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt a. M. Krebs, M. (1998). Organisation von Wissen in Unternehmungen und Netzwerken. Deutscher Univer- sitatsverlag, Wiesbaden. 18
  • 19. Krippendorf, K. (1975). Some principles of information storage and retrieval in society. General Systems, 20:15 { 35. Luhmann, N. (1997). Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt a. M. McLuhan, M. (1970). Understanding Media. McGraw-Hill, New York. Morrison, J. (1997). Organizational memory information systems: Characteristics and development strate- gies. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Hawai'i International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS- 30), Los Alamitos, CA. IEEE Computer Society Press. Mylopoulos, J., Borgida, A., Jarke, M., and Koubarakis, M. (1990). Telos - a language for representing knowledge about information systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 8(4):352 { 362. Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company. Oxford University Press, Oxford. O'Leary, D. (1998). Knowledge-management systems: Converting and connecting. IEEE Intelligent Sys- tems, pages 30 { 33. Ramesh, B. (1997). Towards a meta-model for representing organizational memory. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Hawai'i International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-30), Los Alamitos, CA. IEEE Computer Society Press. Scheer, A.-W. (1998). ARIS - Vom Geschaftsproze zum Anwendungssystem. Springer Verlag, Berlin/Heidelberg, 3. edition. Schlaphof, S. (1998). Design, implementation, and validation of a task-based organizational memory system based on formal business process models (in German). Master's thesis, RWTH Aachen, Fachgruppe Informatik. Stein, E. W. (1995). Organizational memory: Review of concepts and recommendations for management. International Journal of Information Management, 15(1):17 { 32. Stein, E. W. and Zwass, V. (1995). Actualizing organizational memory with information technology. Information Systems Research, 6(2):85 { 117. Wargitsch, C., Wewers, T., and Theisinger, F. (1998). An organizational-memory-based approach for an evolutionary work ow management system - concepts and implementation. In Nunamaker, J. R., editor, Proceedings of the 31st Annual Hawai'i International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS- 31), volume I, pages 174 { 183, Los Alamitos, CA. IEEE Computer Society Press. Wijnhoven, F. (1998). Designing organizational memories: Concept and method. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 8(1):29 { 55. 19
  • 20. Figure 5: Use of BSCW Workspace by CapeOpen Project (ConceptBase Window Dump) 20

×