نوع مقاله : علمی پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 استادیار و عضو هیات علمی؛ دانشکده مهندسی صنایع و سیستم ها؛ دانشگاه صنعتی اصفهان؛
2 دانشیار گروه مدیریت فناوری اطلاعات، دانشکده مدیریت و اقتصاد، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس
3 دانشیار گروه مهندسی فناوری اطلاعات، دانشکده مهندسی صنایع و سیستم ها، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس
چکیده
هدف: امروزه پیاده سازی مدیریت دانش به عنوان یکی از مهمترین راهکارهای استراتژیک شرکت ها جهت کسب مزیت رقابتی پایدار مطرح شده است؛ به نحوی که با تدوین رهنگاشت دانش سازمانی چارچوبی جهت تعیین دانش چرایی، چیستی، چگونگی، کیستی و کجایی؛ و ارتباط فیمابین آنها با هدف برنامه ریزی استراتژیک ارائه می دهند. اما با توجه به پیچیدگی و تغییرات روز افزون محیط خارجی و داخلی سازمان و الزام پویایی اسناد استراتژیک سازمانی، تهیه و تدوین رهنگاشت دانش سازمانی نیازمند ساختار فناورانه دقیق و محتوا محور می باشد
روش شناسی: در این پژوهش جهت تسهیل رهنگاری مدیریت دانش، آنتولوژی دانش سازمانی با رویکرد رهنگاری توسعه می-یابد. آنتولوژی پیشنهادی مطابق متدولوژی دیویس، در سه فاز: امکانسنجی و شروع، استخراج و ارزیابی؛ توسعه یافته است.
یافته ها: در فاز اول: آنتولوژی دانش سازمانی با رویکرد رهنگاری و بااستفاده از بررسی سیستماتیک ادبیات پژوهش، در پنج موجودیت اصلی ("محرکهای محیطی"، "استراتژی ها و اهداف سازمانی"، "فعالیتها و فرایندهای کسب و کار"، "بازیگران" و "منابع") ارائه شده است. در فاز دوم؛ موجودیت های تعریف شده، به صورت جزئی تر توصیف و طبقه بندی لازم بر اساس رویکرد رهنگاری صورت می گیرد؛ در این فاز ارتباط بین موجودیتها و ارزش ارتباطات تعریف شده است.
نتیجه گیری: نامگذاری آنتولوژی مزبور به "آنتولوژی دانش سازمانی STEP C+ با رویکرد رهنگاری" در همین فاز با تعیین ویژگی های قابل ارزش گذاری (Data Properties) هر دانش هدف صورت پذیرفته است. در فاز سوم؛ آنتولوژی توسعه یافته با ثبت دادههای مورد کاربردی و دریافت خروجی SPARQL از آن؛ در فرایند توسعه رهنگاری دانش سازمانی مورد ارزیابی قرار گرفته، تناسب و کفایت آن مورد تایید واقع شد.
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
Developing STEP C+ Organizational Knowledge Ontology: Roadmapping Approach
نویسندگان [English]
- Saba Sareminia 1
- Alireza Hassanzadeh 2
- Shaaban Elahi 2
- Gholam Ali Montazer 3
1 Assistant professor at Department of Industrial and systems Engineering, Isfahan University of Technology, E-mail: s.sareminia@iut.ac.ir
2 Associate professor at Information Technology Management Department, School of Management and Economics, Tarbiat Modares University
3 Associate professor at Information Technology Engineering Department, School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Tarbiat Modares University
چکیده [English]
Background and Objectives: Knowledge is considered as a major strategic resource for the development of organizational competitive advantage. Effective knowledge management (KM) is essential to almost any organization. Regardless of its size or subject matter, an organization should use the knowledge it possesses in the most effective way possible. But the implementation of KM is still challenging. One of the solutions for this challenge which is mentioned in KM literature is knowledge management road mapping. Roadmaps provide a graphical means for exploring and communicating the relationships among any types of knowledge in the organization. But knowledge management road mapping is a dynamic process and artifact which needs some technology-based instruments.
Methodology: In this study, an organizational ontology has developed a beneficiary systematic literature review according to Davis methodology for facilitating organizational knowledge road mapping. This methodology has five major steps: feasibility study, kick-off phase, refinement phase, evaluation phase, and maintenance and evolution phase.
Findings: The purpose of this article is to facilitate the organizational knowledge management road-mapping through focusing on “organizational knowledge ontology” content. Proposed “organizational knowledge ontology” has described in three phases: “feasibility and kick-off”, “refinement” and “evaluation”. In the first phase; organizational knowledge ontology, beneficiary systematic literature review presents five basic entities: “Environmental Drivers”, “Organizational Goals & Strategies”, “Business Processes & Tasks”, “Actors” and “Resources”. In the second phase, these entities have been studied and specified precisely based on the KM Road-mapping (a conceptual map of KM road mapping) and the object and data properties have defined. The conceptual map of KM Road-mapping has three basic concepts: “KM Strategy”, “KM Deliverables” and “KM Strategy Implementation” and the ontology has developed by linking these concepts. The name of the proposed ontology "STEP C+ Organizational Knowledge Ontology" has retrieved from defined data properties for knowledge blocks that are used for valuing them. In the third phase; some individuals and their data properties have been added to the presented ontology and a KM roadmap has been developed for the case study by the use of some queries in SPARQL Tab in protégé and their results.
Discussion: This study like other research has limitations and based on these limitations some research suggestions are advised. It's suggested that supplementary data gathering methods (such as; interview and focus group) are utilized for developing organizational knowledge ontology. In addition, based on the interpretive research limitations, it's preferred that this research will have been repeated by other researchers with diverse viewpoints.
It's recommended for generalizing the research findings; the proposed ontology (STEP C+ Organizational Knowledge Ontology) will have been applied in different projects with diverse types such as service or production projects, public or private projects, small or large projects, ….
It's suggested that the developed ontology be customized according to the influencing factors in developing countries.
Since road mapping is a time and cost-consuming process; maintaining its dynamics depends on continuous updating. Thereupon for facilitating and accelerating the road mapping process; it's recommended an integrated semantic information system (from knowledge registration by knowledge workers step to knowledge roadmap representation step) will have been developed; it's obvious that the proposed ontology could be part of this dynamic and semantic system. Attention to both “organizational knowledge road mapping” and “organizational ontology” contents; simultaneously, maybe less paid in practice than in theory. This research is trying to facilitate the strategic knowledge management process in the organization by combining these two concepts and by operating this combination, open a way to other researches. On the other hand, in this paper, by defining some criteria for valuing knowledge, Knowledge Management Assessment is facilitated.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
- Organizational Knowledge Management
- Knowledge Roadmapping
- Organizational Ontology
- Strategic Knowledge Management
- van den Berg, H. (2013). Three shapes of organisational knowledge. Journal of Knowledge Management, 17(2), 159-174.
Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 107–135.
Awazu, Y. (2006). Managing technology alliances: The case for knowledge management. International Journal of Information Management, 26(6), 484-493.
Balaida, A., Abd Rozana, M. Z., Hikmia, S. N., & Memonb, J. (2016). Knowledge maps: A systematic literature review and directions for future research. International Journal of Information Management, 36(3), 451–475.
Bhatti, W. A., Larimo , J., & Carrasco, I. C. (2016). Strategy's effect on knowledge sharing in host country networks. Journal of Business Research, xxx, xxx-xxx.
Binney, D. (2001). The knowledge management spectrum : understanding the KM landscape. Journal of Knowledge Management, 5(5), 33-42.
Blackwell, J., & Gamble, P. (2001). Knowledge Management : A State of the Art Guide: Kogan Page Publishers.
Botha, A., Kourie, D., & Snyman, R. (2008). Coping with Continuous Change in the Business Environment, Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Technology. : Chandice Publishing Ltd.
Bou‐Llusar, J. C., & Segarra‐Ciprés, M. (2006). Strategic knowledge transfer and its implications for competitive advantage: an integrative conceptual framework. Journal of Knowledge Management, 10(4), 100-112.
Brown, J., & Duguid, P. (1998). Organizing knowledge. California Management Review, 40(3), 90-111.
Dow, R. M., Merri, M., Williams, A., McKay, M., Kirsch, M., Marco, A., . . . Pallaschke, S. (2009). ESOC Knowledge Management Roadmap. Systemic, Cybernetics and Informatics, 7(5).
Dufva, M., & Ahlqvist, T. (2015). Knowledge creation dynamics in foresight: A knowledge typology and exploratory method to analyse foresight workshopsOriginal Research Article. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 94, 251-268.
Elias Carayannis, Anna Grebeniuk, & Meissner, D. (2015). Smart roadmapping for STI policy. Technological Forecasting & Social Change.
Faghihi, A., MemarZadeh, G., Safari, S., & Taheri Goodarzi, H. (1392). Designing a Knowledge Strategy Model for Governmental Organizations in Iran: A Study in the Electrical Industry. Journal of Management Improvement, 2(20), 5-30.
Fernandez, I. B., & Sabherwal, r. (2010). Knowledge Management : Systems and Processes. London: M.E.Sharpe.
Fox, M. S., Barbuceanu, M., Gruninger, M., & Lin, J. (1998). An organization ontology for enterprise modelling Simulation organizations: Computational models of institutions and groups. AAAI/MIT Press, 131-152.
Gammelgaard, J., & Ritter, T. E. (2005). The knowledge retrieval matrix: codification and personification as separate strategies. Journal of Knowledge Management, 9(4), 133-143.
Geum, Y., Lee, H., Lee, Y., & Park, Y. (2015). Development of data-driven technology roadmap considering dependency: An ARM-based technology roadmapping. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 91, 264–279.
Gómez-Pérez, A., Fernández-López, M., & Corcho, O. (2004). Ontological Engineering. Verlag: Springer.
Gottschalk, P. (2005). Strategic Knowledge Management Technology. United States of America: Idea Group Publishing.
Gruber, T. R. (1995). Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 43, 907-928.
H.Bray, O., & L.Garsia, M. (1997). Fundamental of Technology Roadmaping.
H.Bray, O., & L.Garsia, M. (2004). Fundamentals of Technology Roadmapping. Albuquerque, NM 87185-1378: Sandia National Laboratories
Haghighi, P. D., Burstein, F., Zaslavsky, A., & Arbon, P. (2013). Development and evaluation of ontology for intelligent decision support in medical emergency management for mass gatherings. Decision Support Systems, 54(2), 1192-1204.
Han, K. H., & Park, J. W. (2009). Process-centered knowledge model and enterprise ontology for the development of knowledge management system. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(4), 7441-7447.
Holsapple, C. W., & Joshi, K. D. (2004). Chapter 6-A Knowledge Management Ontology Handbook on Knowledge Management 1; : Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
HyunJoung, N., Yoonjung, A., & Park, Y. (2015). A structured approach to explore knowledge flows through technology-based business methods by integrating patent citation analysis and text mining. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 97, 181-192.
Izhar, T. A. T., Torabi, T., Bhatti, M. I., & Liu, F. (2013). Recent developments in the organization goals conformance using ontology. Expert Systems with Applications, 40, 4252–4267.
Knox, H., & Kingston, J. (2007). Choosing your knowledge management strategy. Knowledge Management Research & Practice.
Lee, S., & Park, Y. (2005). Customization of technology roadmaps according to roadmapping purposes: Overall process and detailed modules. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 72, 567 – 583.
Lila Rao, Gunjan Mansingh, Kweku-Muata, & Osei-Bryson. (2012). Building ontology based knowledge maps to assist business process re-engineering. Decision Support Systems, 52, 577–589.
Maedche, A., & Staab, S. (2001). Ontology learning for the semantic web,. IEEE Intell .Syst., 16(2), 72-79.
Morente-Moliner, J. A., Pérez, I. J., Ureñ, M. R., & Herrera-Viedm, E. (2016). Creating knowledge data bases for storing and sharing people knowledge automatically using group decision making and fuzzy ontologies. Information Sciences, 328, 418-434.
Noy, N., & McGuiness, D. L. (2001). Ontology Development 101: A Guide to Creating your first Ontology. Stanford University, Stanford: Stanford Medical Informatics.
O'Sullivan, K. J. (2007). Creating and executing an internal communications plan for knowledge management systems deployments. Journal of Knowledge Management, 11(2), 102-108.
Phaal, R., Farrukh, C. J. P., & Probert, D. R. (2004). Technology roadmapping—A planning framework for evolution and revolution. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 71(1-2), 5-26.
Phaal, R., Farrukh, C. J. P., & Probert, D. R. (2005). Developing a Technology Roadmapping System. 99-111.
R.Phaal, C.J.P.Farrukh, & D.R.Probert. (2009). Visualising strategy: a classification of graphical roadmap forms. International Journal of Technology Management, 47(4), 286-305.
Rao, L., Mansingh, G., & Osei-Bryson, S. (2012). Building ontology based knowledge maps to assist business process re-engineering. Decision Support Systems, 52, 577-589.
Ringland, G. (1998). Scenario planning: managing for the future. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Rinne, M. (2004). Technology roadmaps: Infrastructure for innovation. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 71, 67-80.
Russ, M. (2010). Knowledge Management Strategies for Business Development. Hershey • New York: Business Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global).
Saito, A. K., & Umemoto, M. I. (2007). strategy-based ontology of knowledge. Journal of Knowledge Management, 11(1), 97-114.
Sánchez, D., & Moreno, A. (2008). Learning non-taxonomic relationships from web documents for domain ontology construction. Data Knowledge Engineering, 63(3), 600-623.
Sareminia, S., Hasanzadeh, A., Elahi, S., & Montazer, G. (1397). Developing a Framework for Organizational Knowledge Management Roadmapping: a Content Analysis. Iranian Journal if Information Proccessing and Management, 34(1).
Sharma, S., & Osei-Bryson, K.-M. (2008). Organization-ontology based framework
for implementing the business understanding phase of data mining projects. Paper presented at the International conference on system sciences, Hawaii.
Staab, S., Schnurr, H. P., Studer, R., & Sure, Y. (2001). Knowledge processes and ontologies. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 16(1), 26-34.
Sure, Y., Akkermans, H., Broekstra, J., Davies, J., Ding, Y., Duke, A., . . . Harmelen, F. v. (2002). On-To-Knowledge: Semantic Web Enabled Knowledge Management.
Swart, J., & Powell, J. H. (2006). Men and measures: Capturing knowledge requirements in firms through qualitative systemmodelling. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 57, 10-21.
Tieju, M., Shu, L., & Yoshiteru, N. (2006). Roadmapping as a Way of Knowledge Management for Supporting Scientific Research in Academia. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 23(6), 743–755.
Valls, A., Gibert, K., Sánchez, D., & Batet, M. (2010). Using ontologies for structuring organizational knowledge in Home Care assistance. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 79, 370–387.
Walsh, S. T. (2004). Roadmapping a disruptive technology: a case study the emerging microsystems and top-down nanosystems industry, . Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 71(1-2), 161-185.
Wu, Y., Senoo, D., & Watanabe, R. M. (2010). Diagnosis for organizational knowledge creation: an ontological shift SECI model. Journal of Knowledge Management, 14(6), 791-810.
Yosua, A., & Tjakraatmadja, J. H. (2015). Assessment and Planning of Knowledge Management at PT Dirgantara Indonesia (Persero). Paper presented at the The 6th Indonesia International Conference on Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 12 –14 August 2014.
Young, R. (2010). Knowledge Management Tools and Techniques Manual. 1-2-10 Hirakawacho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 102-0093, Japan: Asian Productivity Organization.
)