Samarbejde og vidensdeling i teori og praksis

Transcription

1 Samarbejde og vidensdeling i teori og praksis Del 2, Knowledge Management Jesper Simonsen [email protected] Datalogi, hus 42.1 Roskilde Universitetscenter

2 Plan for del 2 KM KM i relation til patenter (Frederik Nelsson) En postmoderne kritik af Knowledge Management (Tommy og Jesper) 2 artikler om KM og EPJ: Berg, M. (1999). Patient care information systems and health care work: a sociotechnical approach. International Journal of Medical Informatics (Mikko Winther Johansen) Berg, M. (2002). Patients and professionals in the information society: what might keep us awake in International Journal of Medical Informatics (Martin Paysen) Gruppediskussion om KM begreber og artiklerne Jesper Simonsen Digital Forvaltning. 26/

3 Udgangspunkt og pointe Knowledge og Knowledge Management (fokus: IT støttet vidensdeling, transfer/reuse ) Lærende organisation (Argyris and Schön, 78) Business Process Reengineering (Hammer, 90; 93; Davenport and Short, 90) [T]he management community has come to realize that what an organization and its empoyees know is at the heart of how the organization functions (Davenport and Prusak, 98, p.x) Viden er ikke data Udgangspunktet for at kunne IT understøtte vidensdeling er at forstå konteksten for denne vidensdeling Forskellige typer af consumers har behov for forskellige typer af KM systemer Jesper Simonsen Digital Forvaltning. 26/

4 Kernelitteratur i KM Nonaka: A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation Davenport & Prusak: Working Knowledge. How Organizations Manage What They Know Markus: Toward a Theory of Knowledge Reuse: Types of Knowledge Reuse Situations and Factors in Reuse Success. Dixon: Common Knowledge. How Companies Thrive by Sharing What They Know Succes/failures-eksempler (Eureka, Facit) Bobrow & Whalen: Community Knowledge Sharing in Practice: The Eureka Story Bansler & Havn: Knowledge Sharing in Heterogeneous Groups: An Empirical Study of IT-Support for Sharing Better Practices Jesper Simonsen Digital Forvaltning. 26/

5 Data, information, viden Data Samling af tegn [S]tructured records of transactions (Davenport and Prusak, 98, p. 2) RUCQuickPlaceServer CN=frank/OU= alpha-qp/ou=qp/o= bank [05/May/2001:14:58: ] "GET /QuickPlace/ alpha-qp/main.nsf/$defaultview/505538f1eb2b9dbf ?opendocument& Form=FolderInit&NoRedirect&CacheResults&TimeStamp=41256A00004DA4F3& LoginName=CN=frank%2FOU=alpha-QP%2FOU=QP%2FO=bank HTTP/1.1" Information Meningsfulde data (forudsætter tydningssystem ) message (ibid, p. 3) We transform data into information by adding value in various ways Contextualize Categorize Calculate Correct Condense Review af IS-litteraturens definitioner på Data og information, se Checkland and Holwell (1998) p. 92ff. Jesper Simonsen Digital Forvaltning. 26/

6 Data, information, viden Viden Viden er information som man lærer noget af justified true belief (Nonaka, 94, p. 15) Knowledge is a multifaceted concept with multilayered meanings (p.15) Knowledge is a fluid mix of framed experience, values, contextual information, and expert insight that provides a framework for evaluating and incorporating new experiences and iformation. It originates and is applied in the minds of knowers. In organizations, if often becomes embedded not only in documents or repositories but also in organizational routines, processes, practices, and norms (Davenport and Prusak, 98, p. 5) Knowledge derives from information [by] transformations [ ] as: Comparison Consequences Connections Conversation Jesper Simonsen Digital Forvaltning. 26/

7 Vidensskabelse Nonaka (94) om Organizational Knowledge Creation Tacit [tavs] vs. explicit knowledge (med ref. til Polanyi, 66) Basic assumption: Knowledge is created through conversion between tacit and explicit knowledge Tacit knowledge To Explicit knowledge Tacit knowledge From Explicit knowledge Socialization Internalization Externalization Combination Jesper Simonsen Digital Forvaltning. 26/

8 KM og IT IT kan kun overføre information, dvs. mediere eksplicit viden KM systemer refererer typisk til mindre struktureret information i dokumentsamlinger (dokumenthåndteringssystemer på intranet, fx BSCW) Formål: At mediere vidensoverførsel mellem de som har viden og dem som ikke har Udfordringer (Grudin: Groupware and social dynamics: Eight challenges for developers, CACM, 94): Disparity in work and benefit Obtaining critical mass Jesper Simonsen Digital Forvaltning. 26/

9 Disparity in work and benefit Groupware applications often require additional work from individuals who do not perceive a direct benefit form the use of the application Electronic calendar system Knowledge Management systems in general (with regard to decontextualizing information) Adressing the problem Use authority! Demonstrate both collective and indirect benefits Reduce work required of nonbeneficiaries Design along with IT processes for using it that create benefits for all Jesper Simonsen Digital Forvaltning. 26/

10 Critical mass Groupware may not enlist the critical mass of users required to be useful Electronic calendar system Web-dating Adressing the problem: Use authority! Build in incentives for use Design use processes that provide or emphasizes individual and collective benefits Jesper Simonsen Digital Forvaltning. 26/

11 KM begreber (Markus, 2001) Knowledge Reuse Process (4 dele) 1. Capturing and documenting knowledge Passivt/aktivt, before/after-the fact strategi 2. Packaging knowledge fx tilføje/fjerne kontekst, indexering ift. klassifikationsskema 3. Distributing/disseminating knowledge (give andre adgang) passivt/aktivt (facilitation) 4. Reusing knowledge 4.1 defining the search question 4.2 the search for, and location of, expertise (or expert) 4.3 selection of appropriate expert advice (or expert) 4,4 applying the knowledge ( recontextualization ) Jesper Simonsen Digital Forvaltning. 26/

12 KM begreber (2) Roles: Producer intermediary consumer Knowledge producer originator: records explicit knowledge or makes tacit knowledge explicit Knowledge intermediary prepares for reuse: eliciting, sanitizing, structuring, summarizing, indexing, dissiminating, facilitating, etc. Knowledge consumer retrieves and applies Roller kan udføres af samme eller forskellige aktører og grupper af aktører IT s rolle: Typisk som intermediary. (Dele af producer og consumer rollen ses ifm. AI, fx regelbaserede systemer) Forholdet mellem producer og consumer afgørende for karakteristik af reuse situation og forståelse af kontext Jesper Simonsen Digital Forvaltning. 26/

13 4 knowledge reuse situations 1. Shared Work Producers Working (together on a team) on a shared work product Homogeneous work groups or cross-functional teams Relatively few problems with knowledge reuse 2. Shared Work Practitioners Community of Practice (Wenger, 98) Produce for each other to use Few problems applying knowledge but location and selection are problematic 3. Expertise-Seeking Novices Knowledge transfer (vs. knowledge sharing) Great difficulties at all stages 4. Secondary Knowledge Miners Data Mining (CACM, 2002) EPJ (!) Jesper Simonsen Digital Forvaltning. 26/

14 Pointe fra de 4 KM situationer Forskellige typer af consumers har behov for forskellige typer af KM systemer Shared work producers need to develop/maintain own protocols Shared work practitioners need contextualized knowledge Expertise-seeking novices need decontextualized knowledge + help to recontextualize information for their particular setting Secondary Knowledge Miners need producers to document knowledge in consistent (standardized) and structured ways Interne KM systemer kan ikke bare plugges på internettet! Jesper Simonsen Digital Forvaltning. 26/

15 Who authors the entries and for whom? Indhold afhænger af om man dokumenterer til: Ourselves (mig, gruppen) Similar others (fx examinator, censor) Dissimilar others (jvf. kommunikationsudd.) 2 problemer: First, the records knowledge producers make purposely for their own use are not likely to meet the needs of others. Second, the records knowledge producers make for others may not meet their own needs, and therefore, they may not have adequate incentives to produce quality documents that need the needs of others (ibid, p. 79, jvf. også Grudin, 94) Fokus på: Costs Incentives Human and technical intermediaries (se fx Simonsen and Pors, 2003; Henriksen et al., 2002) Jesper Simonsen Digital Forvaltning. 26/

16 Pointer - og diskussion Viden er ikke data Udgangspunktet for at kunne IT understøtte vidensdeling er at forstå konteksten for denne vidensdeling Forskellige typer af consumers har behov for forskellige typer af KM systemer - ex: Klinisk personale vs. adm./politisk niveau i sundhedsvæsenet Medarbejdere internt i forvaltningen vs. borgeren Deltagerne i en projektgruppe vs. andre studerende på RUC Dig selv vs. dine medstuderende i projektgruppen 1. Muligheder, udfordringer og problemer ser I for KM i digital forvaltning? 2. Eksempler på KM i digital forvaltning? Jesper Simonsen Digital Forvaltning. 26/

17 Referencer Argyris, C., and Schön, D. A. (1978). Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., Reading, Massachusetts. Bansler, J. P., and Havn, E. C. (2002). "Knowledge Sharing in Heterogeneous Groups: An Empirical Study of IT- Support for Sharing Better Practices." The Third European Conference on Organizational Knowledge, Learning and Capabilities, 5-6 April 2002, Athens, Greece, ( [email protected] for kopi). Bobrow, D. G., and Whalen, J. (2002). Community Knowledge Sharing in Practice: The Eureka Story. Journal of the Society for Organizational Learning 4. CACM (2002): Communication of the ACM, Special Issue on Data Mining, vol. 45, no. 8, august Checkland, P., and Holwell, S. (1998). Information, Systems and Information Systems - making sense of the field. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester. Davenport, T. H., and Short, J. E. (1990). The New Industrial Engineering: Information Technology and Business Process Redesign. Sloan Management Review Davenport, T. H. (1994). Reengineering: Business Change of Mythic Proportions? MIS Quarterly Dixon, N. M. (2000). Common Knowledge. How Companies Thrive by Sharing What They Know. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Mass. Grudin, J. (1994). Groupware and social dynamics: Eight challenges for developers. Communications of the ACM 37, Hammer, M. (1990). Reengineering Work: Don't Automate, Obliterate. Harvard Business Review Hammer, M., and Champy, J. (1993). Reengineering the Corporation. A Manifesto for Business Revolution. HaperBusiness/HaperCollins Publishers, New York, N.Y. Henriksen, D. L., Nicolajsen, H. W., and Pors, J. K. (2002). "Towards Variation or Uniformity? Comparing Technology-Use Mediations of Web-Based Groupware." Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Information Systems, ECIS'2002. ( [email protected] for kopi). Markus, M. L. (2001). Toward a Theory of Knowledge Reuse: Types of Knowledge Reuse Situations and Factors in Reuse Success. Journal of Management Information Systems 18, Nonaka, I. (1994). A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation. Organizational Science 5, Polanyi, M. (1966). The Tacit Dimension. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London. Simonsen, J., and Pors, J. K. (2003). "Conditions for Change Related to Groupware in a Distributed Organization a Case Study." Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Information Systems, ECIS'2003. ( [email protected] for kopi). Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice - learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press. Jesper Simonsen Digital Forvaltning. 26/