tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7585040184982733654.post1637926789462575705..comments2024-02-06T11:25:04.090+00:00Comments on Knoco stories: How do you structure your knowledge?Nick Miltonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02413967879826601863noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7585040184982733654.post-54641594151349152592011-05-09T12:35:40.542+01:002011-05-09T12:35:40.542+01:00No, I am sorry, i don't have any experience wi...No, I am sorry, i don't have any experience with this model.Nick Miltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02413967879826601863noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7585040184982733654.post-65417034020759531822011-05-09T11:01:27.397+01:002011-05-09T11:01:27.397+01:00Good post indeed Nick, very pragmatic and well men...Good post indeed Nick, very pragmatic and well mentioning the 2 fundamentals: ownership and retrievability.<br /><br />In our company, we have chosen and recommended a structure since a few years (through processes for the Business Units and through functions for the services entities) and it is reasonably well implemented across the company in the Sharepoint platform.<br /><br />Nevertheless, we could go in the future to a more collaborative infrastructure more oriented to an "individual/document" model than the the former classical model "entity/repository".<br /><br />In such a "individual/document" platform, it seems to me more complicated to enforce the principle of SINGLE OWNERSHIP that you mention in both your post and the here above comment.<br /><br />If you already have some thoughts or cross-checking information from some companies already involved in such a new model, it would be interesting to share with the community. Perhaps something based on the steps distinction that you are making in another comment between "Knowledge in the making" and "Knowledge in the Knowledge base" ?Jean-Louis Lieutenanthttp://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=18126620&trk=tab_pronoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7585040184982733654.post-28458018599462647412011-05-08T15:08:06.065+01:002011-05-08T15:08:06.065+01:00Sure, you can have multiple descriptive structures...Sure, you can have multiple descriptive structures. What you CAN'T have, Pancho, is multiple ownership structures, and still satisfy single-point accountability.Nick Miltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02413967879826601863noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7585040184982733654.post-45359067136515771782011-05-07T23:44:13.165+01:002011-05-07T23:44:13.165+01:00Good post Nick. I'd add that the possible str...Good post Nick. I'd add that the possible structures are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they shouldn't be. The best way to have knowledge available at points of use is to have multiple structures intertwined with indexes, tocs, and contextual linking into a scale-free network.Panchohttp://articles.geometrica.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7585040184982733654.post-16387682075213702582011-05-06T13:05:23.522+01:002011-05-06T13:05:23.522+01:00Nick
another great post - we've just been in t...Nick<br />another great post - we've just been in the process of reviving our COP's when we've moved them into Sharepoint - and I've included some links to a couple of your blog posts in some introductory lines<br /><br />I like the balance of loose structure in COP's & Wikis - to respond to issues as they arise - however tagging / metadata enables future findability in 6 or 26 months time<br /><br />and in the past when it came to archiving engineering industrial CSI reports in EMC Documentum - folders & structure were the go<br /><br />anyway as I set up Document libraries - lists etc in Sharepoint I make a point of setting up categories / tagging <br /><br />thanks for sharing your insightsKerrie Anne Christianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03958234545898242828noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7585040184982733654.post-68286476644572350902011-05-06T09:55:07.169+01:002011-05-06T09:55:07.169+01:00Social Media is a technology, Gerald. It doesn'...Social Media is a technology, Gerald. It doesn't have to be structureless. There is no reason why you can't, for example, have communities of practice set up on structured lines, using social media to communicate within the community (and you could argue that communites have been working this way since the days of Lotus Notes).<br /><br />Secondly, many organisations have a transition and validation point between "knowledge in the making" (ongoing community discussions, lessons in the database, etc) and "Knowledge in the knowledge base". So the social media are the short-term memory, and the knowledge base is the long term memory.Nick Miltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02413967879826601863noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7585040184982733654.post-55872503637148764742011-05-06T09:48:37.909+01:002011-05-06T09:48:37.909+01:00Hi, Nick,
easily agree, I would say: find the str...Hi, Nick, <br />easily agree, I would say: find the structure that creates most value out of your knowledge.<br />Taking this post, and adding your recent contribution on the human memory storage accuracy, what does this mean for Social Media?<br />Do we have to just take it as rather structureless and almost without memory depth? How do see the linkage between the Social Media and sustainable Knowledge Structures?<br />regards<br />geraldgeraldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04499751971824812463noreply@blogger.com