Semantic Integration of Process Models into Knowledge Management: A Social Tagging Approach Michael Prilla

Information and Technology Management (IMTM) Institute für Applied Work Science (IAW) Ruhr University of Bochum IMTM – An interdisciplinary Team: Applied Work Science, Communication Science, Computer Science , Engineering Science, Pedagogy, Sociology, Social Science Focus areas: Process Modeling Knowledge Management Innovation and Creativity

Initial Situation Process Models are useful... Essential tools in business and science Encoding of organizational knowledge ...but neglected in Knowledge Management KM dominated by textual content Limited access to available (PM) knowledge Lacking relations to other content Available support by isolated applications

Process Models are useful...

Essential tools in business and science

Encoding of organizational knowledge

...but neglected in Knowledge Management

KM dominated by textual content

Limited access to available (PM) knowledge

Lacking relations to other content

Available support by isolated applications

Resulting Problems Observations Scarce usage in Organizations Lacking support for Work with Process Models (Knowledge Work) Solution: Integration into KM Promoting PMs as valuable information sources Supporting model related tasks Approach Social Tagging and Integration into Work Tasks Work In Progress

Observations

Scarce usage in Organizations

Lacking support for Work with Process Models (Knowledge Work)

Solution: Integration into KM

Promoting PMs as valuable information sources

Supporting model related tasks

Approach

Social Tagging and Integration into Work Tasks

Work In Progress

Fostering Usage of Process Models Scarce knowledge of modeling Scarce Usage and Awareness of Models Improve awareness of process models as information source: Integrate Process Models into KM content Improve modeling skills: Teaching and Training BUT: Cold start problem Still lacking awareness

Fostering Usage of Process Models Increasing knowledge of modeling Usage and Awareness of Models Improve awareness of process models as information source: Integrate Process Models into KM content Motivation to create and share models Support for modeling and knowledge acquisition

Analysis: Requirements Overcoming Complexity Gap: Semantic Description Low usage burden (high ceiling) Motivation for participation Integration of Stakeholders (KWs) Give everybody a voice Improve knowledge acquisition and distribution Integration into Work Tasks

Overcoming Complexity Gap: Semantic Description

Low usage burden (high ceiling)

Motivation for participation

Integration of Stakeholders (KWs)

Give everybody a voice

Improve knowledge acquisition and distribution

Integration into Work Tasks

The Complexity Gap Linear and coherent structure Overview difficult (on first sight) Understanding needs subjection Ramifications and sub-procedures Quick overview (scanning) Understanding needs context Overcoming the Gap in KM needs equal handling: Semantic Content Description

Linear and coherent structure

Overview difficult (on first sight)

Understanding needs subjection

Ramifications and sub-procedures

Quick overview (scanning)

Understanding needs context

Social Tagging for equal Handling Semantics to level out the Gap between heterogeneous content Analysis of available Technology Conclusion: (Starting from) Tagging suitable for task at hand Requirement Social Tagging Ontologies Semantic Content Description + * ++ Low Usage Burden (and high Ceiling) ++ (learning effort, quality) o (adoption and adaptation) Stakeholder Integration ++ (bottom-up, associative) o (learning effort)

Semantics to level out the Gap between heterogeneous content

Analysis of available Technology

Conclusion: (Starting from) Tagging suitable for task at hand

Tagging für Process Models Existing Tags slides present presenting finish talk powerpoint instruction nervous questions presentation

Supporting Knowledge Work with PMs Limited support  limited content distribution and access Support for Knowledge Workers Freedom of choice for Tools Personal Information Management Implications Integrate support into available tools Embed group-related tasks into individual work Intertwine models and KM content

Limited support  limited content distribution and access

Support for Knowledge Workers

Freedom of choice for Tools

Personal Information Management

Implications

Integrate support into available tools

Embed group-related tasks into individual work

Intertwine models and KM content

Implementation Supporting functions: Sharing from modeling applications Intertwining of textual and model content KM support for modeling task Prototype Kolumbus 2 KM application SeeMe modeling editor

Supporting functions:

Sharing from modeling applications

Intertwining of textual and model content

KM support for modeling task

Prototype

Kolumbus 2 KM application

SeeMe modeling editor

Share and Intertwine with KM content Share models, tags and related information from modeling applications Intertwine models and other (existing) content by tags

Support modeling task Deliver related information (text, models, …) while modeling

Summary and Further Work Integration of Process Models into KM content Bottom-Up, Social Tagging Tight integration into Knowledge Work Remaining Work Continuation of Empirical Grounding Refinement of Prototypes Improvement of Tagging support (Clustering, …) Evaluation Integration of other Applications

Integration of Process Models into KM content

Bottom-Up, Social Tagging

Tight integration into Knowledge Work

Remaining Work

Continuation of Empirical Grounding

Refinement of Prototypes

Improvement of Tagging support (Clustering, …)

Evaluation

Integration of other Applications

Semantic Integration of Process Models into Knowledge Management: A Social Tagging Approach Michael Prilla

KM-supported Model Lifecycle Support exchange: Integrate in KM content Contextualize Include corresponding information Integration into Modeling KM with Process Model Support Support usage: Make use of encoded knowledge Reach relevant actors Support enrichment: Expatiate actors’ perspectives Add context Link content Support modelling: Show contextualized information Offer similar models

Support exchange:

Integrate in KM content

Contextualize

Include corresponding information

Support usage:

Make use of encoded knowledge

Reach relevant actors

Support enrichment:

Expatiate actors’ perspectives

Add context

Link content

Support modelling:

Show contextualized information

Offer similar models

Small user groups

Implementation Enable tagging support for applications Tags provide (semantic) glue for content linkage Prototype: SeeMe Model Editor and Kolumbus 2

Enable tagging support for applications

Tags provide (semantic) glue for content linkage

Prototype: SeeMe Model Editor and Kolumbus 2

Technical support: Framework Receive content while modelling Tag based queries Stream content Tag Based Exchange via Web Service Share models from modelling application Basis: Tags XML exchange Include linked content Generic framework: Integrate multiple application s and information sources

Receive content while modelling

Tag based queries

Stream content

Share models from modelling application

Basis: Tags

XML exchange

Include linked content

Synergy potential Link relevant knowledge to BPM content (filter) Process oriented KM (Semantic) Business Process Management Collaborative process modelling tools Knowledge Management for Process Models Use data from BPM in KM system Find related processes Provide helpful data while modeling (Semi-) automatically add content to structure Share perspectives

Semantics: Collaboration vs. Publishing Control by a few Anticipation of categorization Unidirectional information exchange Slowly changing Useful in slowly changing, precise information structures and vocabularies Social Tagging: Collaboration Content Content Categories, Ontologies: Publishing Control by all Users („Prosumers“) Emergence of categorization Bidirectional information exchange Flexibility Useful in quickly adapting, multi-perspective and fuzzy information structures

Control by a few

Anticipation of categorization

Unidirectional information exchange

Slowly changing

Useful in slowly changing, precise information structures and vocabularies

Control by all Users („Prosumers“)

Emergence of categorization

Bidirectional information exchange

Flexibility

Useful in quickly adapting, multi-perspective and fuzzy information structures

Semantic Spectrum Choice of semantic support depends on Task to be supported and overall goal Organizational culture (hierarchies, …) Present vocabulary People working with it Ontologies Taxonomies Thesauri Categories Tag Clusters Tag Proposals Free Tagging Flexible Perceptable Ambigious Individual Easy Flat Precise Deductive Machine readable Levelling Complex Fixed

Choice of semantic support depends on

Task to be supported and overall goal

Organizational culture (hierarchies, …)

Present vocabulary

People working with it

Model contextualization business order management

Users‘ perspective on content Source: Shaw and Gaines (1998) Furnas, CHI 2006: “different users use different terms to describe the same thing” Domain User 2 User 1 User 5 User 3 User 4 Terminology Terminology Terminology Terminology Terminology