<link href='https://www.blogger.com/dyn-css/authorization.css?targetBlogID=5235436173531136639&amp;zx=7c963dfb-0701-43f0-862a-fb93c0c3540f' rel='stylesheet'/>

Slicing information into layers is of course a simplification of real world situation using brutal force. However, if we don’t use conceptualization – we cannot communicate to each other – humans communicate with symbols. Each layer presented below probably manages to capture the essential and differentiating characteristics of each layer. First time I read about IM Layers in some Forrester’s study. They had defined an IA reference model containing: Conceptual, Logical and Physical layer. I have just renamed bottom one as Implementation, due to many people complained about the word “physical”.

The major enhancement I made by adding Contextual layer on top. Even though it sounds like hyper abstract on top of already abstract cake – I believe it deserves its place. Should we consider IM and IA  from strategic performance management (SPM) viewpoint, it becomes imperative to bind Information Big Picture to business goals and direction.

Some years ago – even before I added the top layer, I thought, smart heads have already developed concepts for SPM – how could I utilize that fine work as aligning attributes for Knowledge Maps (or any other conceptual representation of information)? Then I ran into the Strategy Maps (Kaplan&Norton) and did few prototypes. It looks pretty promising to loosely bind Knowledge Map to Business.

image

  • Strategy Map provides a framework through which we can reflect strategy and different viewpoints to given big picture of information. Viewpoints are for example from Balance Score Card perspectives: customer, financial, learning & growth, internal business process. Views could also be your own special interests, say knowledge management or Time To Market as part your business transformation initiative.
  • Knowledge Map is an intelligent big picture of your core business information. What data is needed in your daily business or in the future model are described: Business Objects are mapped to Information Entities, Relationships of entities are managed as well as Core Attributes. Special care is taken on attributes pointing to actual information resources (links). Sematic web technology provides the best standards and tools for this type of concept, they provide natural support for subject identity management and merging data etc. By default - The knowledge map spans across silo systems and adapts to Big Data!
  • Logical types, structures and categories are managed at logical layer, which is pretty much the space we often understand as IM. At this level you can identify traditional system boundaries such as CMS, ERP, PDM or organizations: HR, Sales R&D and so one.
  • Content and data of any kind in persistent form are stored and accessible in various systems at physical layer – including Cloud (Open Linked Data). Often the metadata is the only way of binding Info Entity to files in IM systems and further on to the Knowledge Map. It has proven to be very expensive (and slow) trying to harmonize information in legacy systems at this level. It is not even possible to comprehend a meaningful and useful abstraction on the data unless you elevate you thinking to Knowledge Map layer.

The next table tries to explain each layer in more details. I leave this for your review, since the design is under construction and still looking for a full scale business case Iloiset kasvot . One previous Knowledge Map endeavour is described in slide set: Ontology driven portal for NSN.

image

0

Add a comment

We often work from inside out, or from bottom to top when designing information systems or creating good quality content to delight our customers or readers. However, my finding is that the effort is often wasted. Just by observing my own behavior when searching some critical piece of information or a source of inspiration, I can question:

how could I even consider searching, if I am not aware of potential information even if I am aware of it – say, someone mentioned it somewhere – that does not guarantee that I can find or can have access to the information. I once found an interesting article in Spanish and had difficulties to comprehend the content (with a little help from G-translate).

You said semantic - are you a linguist?

It is actually quite doable to start using semantic technologies. Read this and figure out how it would happen in your organization.

I have often faced a communication challenge – a person comes to me and asks “what is semantic technology?” Especially, when one linguist wanted to know how do I define semantics (in IT)? – I had to step back and do some home work on the topic.

I did not mean “data is shit” but did I make it clear enough? “Data is the shit” would probably send the message correctly to some people – at lest in certain  context – assuming you speak English and are aware of this particular slightly vulgar expression. Now that I grabbed your attention, I’d like to go on with the topic of data in context and semantics of information. By no means, I am not a pro what comes to information semantics or cognitive science, but I can see the importance of understanding meaning of terms and information in general. Should you long for good reading about the topic I could recommend books – such as Cognitive Spaces - authored by Peter Gärdenfors. As I prepared for the MDM 2012 -seminar presentation I studied semantics of information a bit and created a simplified description. But let’s first do some clarification on key terms and concepts – such as the concept. What is semantics anyway? I used Peter’s book as well chosen quality reference. His book introduces this fundamental diagram depicting components of cognitive semantics.

The Semantic Technology & Business Conference (SemTechBiz) was held in SFO in early June-. It was my first time in the series of conferences, so I have no perspective on previous years, but many people concluded that this year there were a bigger number of solid larger customer cases. In addition, some big players were on the move, namely IBM, Oracle and Software AG.

Sorry, this post comes kinda late, but here is my brief summary with some highlights.

Those who have been involved in semantic web phenomenon have probably wondered for a long time – why the rest of the world just doesn’t get it? Why don’t search tools, content management and publishing  systems take advantage of ontologies and subject centric computing? I kept wondering myself - why doesn't everybody just utilize ISO Topic Maps or RDF/OWL since it would make information more manageable, understandable, interchangeable and – systems would become more intelligent?

Because – it wa

Too often organizations end up buying more or less closed “black box” systems. For example, some large ERP vendors do not disclose the logical data model of their system excusing a business secret. Don’t get fooled by a sales guy when shopping a taxonomy tools for managing and delivering the data for various clients.

Simple and best way to evaluate how well the tool and vendor support your business needs is to define a logical reference data model based on your business requirements.

Slicing information into layers is of course a simplification of real world situation using brutal force. However, if we don’t use conceptualization – we cannot communicate to each other – humans communicate with symbols. Each layer presented below probably manages to capture the essential and differentiating characteristics of each layer. First time I read about IM Layers in some Forrester’s study. They had defined an IA reference model containing: Conceptual, Logical and Physical layer.

This is an update on my earlier post From Information Age to Connected Age. I learnt from my colleague Dilyana Simons that we are actually in migration to what she described an era of consumer experience. Fair enough, seems to make sense.

3 Taxonomy development work

The development work was planned to follow well thought five phased process. It is easy to design a savvy process in the convenient office, but the reality turned out to be somewhat different.

3.1 Phased taxonomy work

The project followed loosely the planned phases. Agile approach intended to be used in the 3rd and 4th phase were not achieved in practice.

This section contains observations on my information modeling related issues regarding one customer project.

Getting back to this IWP measurability one more time. Based on years of experiences Microsoft researchers presented a simplified formula for generating I-work value. It reassembles the model of measuring value generation of process automation. I just added one mandatory item on top to highlight that without adequate “IWP culture”  none of the value factors comes true.

1 Role of taxonomy in corporate IM

Taxonomy is a concept to categorize information entities in the form of hierarchy. Structure represents presumed relationships of classes for the real-world entities that they present. As data model it is a tree-like structure.

1.1 Information challenges

Just briefly some reasoning why taxonomies have grabbed attention in corporate IM.

Knowledge is not a power unless shared. I posted this article a while ago in 2009 in my internal Tieto blog, but as we are witnessing how Social Media globally changes the world and communication in companies (Yammer, MS Live, Eureka) – I thought - let’s recycle the “prediction”.

In the eve of Information age, most of employees worked on routine type of tasks, reflecting the practices and mindset of preceding era - Industrial age.

As I often have to touch the knowledge work and human issues while exploring information flows and data models – I decided to write few words on people and learning.  Here’s my two cents…

Human issues – this is the most crucial factor in the success of knowledge systems, since unless individual cannot innovate and contribute – the team does not perform and the organization fails.

My definition: I-work is about non-routine work requiring people

to deal with ambiguity – no rules to follow.

Typically I-worker activities are: discovering information to find answers, innovating new ideas, all forms of communicating with other people, collaborating in teams and providing leadership.

18.9. 2009

As TweetDeck newbie user - I have pondered whether "web 3.0 stuff" is a source of distraction rather than tools boosting my productivity. First time I tried out Twitter, I thought - this is like odd - mega SMSing trough the internet to some weirdoes who just happen follow my tweet for some strange reason.

I started to lose my interest pretty soon. I got no time to follow excerpts from some people which I don’t know and there is no guarantee on the quality of the content either.
2

Information worker productivity - how strange is that?

Some time ago I was asked to study what does it take to improve productivity of a normal brain labour in typical knowledge intense organization, such as consulting company.

I should actually first define what I mean by Information in this context. Shortly put, information has little value unless you articulate it and put in the format that it communicates to other people.
1
Translate
Translate
Powered by Google TranslateTranslate
Blog Archive
About Me
About Me
My Photo
More about professional me: http://www.linkedin.com/in/heimohanninen ... but I'd rather be gliding ...
Loading

Original text


Dynamic Views theme. Powered by Blogger.