PART D – KNOWLEDGE TECHNOLOGIES

 

INTRODUCTION

 

Prior to the Internet, there were many technologies that supported two-way communications. We had telephones, we had the telegraph. We were familiar with technological mediation of those kinds of conversations. Also, prior to the Internet, we had lots of technologies that supported one-way outbound, television, radio, newspapers. And, of course, we had the printing press.

 

So although the Internet does good things for these previous patterns of communication, they're patterns we knew from before. The last technology that had any real effect on the way people sat down and talked together was the table. There was no technological mediation for group conversations. The closest we got was the conference call, which never really worked.

 

We've had social software for 40 years at most, dated from the Plato Bulletin Board System and we've only had 10 years or so of widespread availability, so we're just finding out what works. We're still learning how to make these kinds of things.

 

Software that supports group interaction is a fundamentally unsatisfying definition in many ways, because it doesn't point to a specific class of technology. If you look at email, it obviously supports social patterns, but it can also support a broadcast pattern. If I'm a spammer, I'm going to mail things out to a million people, but they're not going to be talking to one another, and I'm not going to be talking to them. Spam is email, but it isn't social. If I'm mailing you, and you're mailing me back, we're having point-to-point and two-way conversation, but not one that creates group dynamics. So email doesn't necessarily support social or group patterns, although it can (Tiwana 2003).

 

Groups operate in real-time, therefore, knowledge is created, captured and shared instantaneously (Stough et al 2000).

 

Can the knowledge created be captured by technology?

 

You cannot specify in advance what the group will do, and so you can't substantiate in software everything you expect to have happen.

 

COLLABORATING IN CYBERSPACE

 

Knowledge management is concerned with collaborating, that is, the process of working jointly with others especially in an intellectual endeavour (Boyd 2003b).

 

Cyberspace, a term coined by the science fiction writer, William Gibson (1984), can be described as the impression of space and community formed by computers, computer networks, and their users; the virtual "world" that Internet users inhabit when they are on-line.

 

Groupware is technology designed to facilitate the work of groups. While traditional technologies such as the telephone technically qualify as groupware, the term is ordinarily used to refer to a specific class of technologies relying on modern computer networks (Ciborra 1996).

 

However, as Howard Rheingold (1993) states :

 

“The technology…has the potential to bring enormous leverage to ordinary citizens at relatively little cost...But the technology...must be used intelligently and deliberately by an informed population.”
 

The significance of cyberspace to those who wish to work collaboratively is that it is initially ‘formless’ and ‘forms’ can be created to suit the needs of the collaborators. There are now many groupware or social software tools available which can be customised to the needs of the users. You should take time to examine Etienne Wenger’s survey of community technologies which you will find at:

 

http://www.ewenger.com/tech/index.htm

 

Why should we use collaborative, knowledge-sharing technologies?

 

We use them because, they are:

 

  • Asynchronous

  • Flexible

  • Informal

  • Economic

  • Time-saving

  • Multi-media

 

And, as such, they assist the knowledge-based organisation in its development (Skyrme 1999).

 

LISTS & NEWSGROUPS

 

Lists are used to enable a group of people to keep in touch with each other easily using email. Lists allow the same message to be sent to all members at once. Messages on lists are frequently archived.

 

You can find existing ones by going to:

 

http://www.liszt.com

 

There are more than 100,000 worldwide.

 

Lists consist of two email addresses. One is the list server and this is the address you send commands to. The second email address is for sending messages to people who are subscribed to the list.

 

Most people on lists are ‘lurkers’. It is sometimes best just to watch and not contribute for a while until you get the ‘feel’ of the list.

 

You will be able to send a message to the whole list or simply to the person who sent the message. Make sure you know which is which!

 

There is a whole body of ‘netiquette’ governing this medium. See the ground rules at:

 

http://www.albion.com/netiquette/

 

There are four types of mailing list:

 

1. Unmoderated: Joining is automatic; anyone can post; instantly forwarded to all.

 

2. Moderated: Email the list owner before being accepted onto the list.

 

3. Fully Moderated: All email to the list is fully vetted before distribution.

 

4. Announce: Messages are sent from the list owner, which are broadcast to all list members.

 

The strengths of lists:

 

  • Keep up-to-date on topics of shared interest

  • Share lessons learnt and best practice

  • Build up personal contacts

  • Useful for longtitudinal focus groups

  • Remote researchers can work in close collaboration

 

The weaknesses of list:

 

  • No body language, intonation or accent

  • Netiquette: Protocols; Shouting; Spamming; Flaming; Acronyms & Smileys

 

Newsgroups are public discussion areas, frequently distributed internationally, using the Usenet system.

 

The strengths of newsgroups:

 

  • Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

  • Many in number: 60,000+ subjects covered.

 

The weaknesses of newsgroups:

 

  • Difficult to establish through Usenet and the ‘call for votes’ system

  • Often poor in quality

 

INSTANT MESSAGING

 

There are five main Instant Messaging (Boyd 2003a) packages:

 

Internet Relay Chat http://www.mirc.com

ICQ http://www.icq.com

AOL Instant Messenger http://www.aol.com

MSN Messenger http://messenger.msn.com/

Yahoo Messenger http://messenger.yahoo.com

 

The strengths of Instant Messaging are:

 

  • Very rich source of first-hand up-to-the-minute information

  • Useful in emergency and high risk situations

  • Easy to set up

  • Have many add-on features including:- whiteboards, joint surfing and file sharing

 

The weaknesses of Instant Messaging are:

 

  • Need to be on-line

  • Easily abused and disrupted as some individuals seem to think it is fun to do this

 

VIRTUAL MEETING PLACES

 

A Virtual Meeting is a way of holding a discussion on an Intranet or through the Internet.

 

The strengths of virtual meeting places:

 

  • Build team and capacity for organisational change.

  • Break down organisational barriers.

  • Establish new, non-hierarchical, ways of working.

 

The weaknesses of virtual meeting places:

 

  • Some organisational cultures will find them alienating.

  • Out-dated management systems consider them disruptive.

 

VIRTUAL CONFERENCING

 

Virtual conferencing is a form of group discussion that uses text messages stored on a computer as a communication medium. It can also include various types of real-time, or synchronous, communication, such as chat rooms, voice-based teleconferencing, or video conferencing.

 

Knowledgeboard (http://www.knowledgeboard.com) is a form of virtual conferencing. You may also want to take a look at:

 

The Meta Network: http://www.tmn.com

Caucus Systems: http://www.caucus.com

 

The strengths of virtual conferencing:

 

  • Closely replicates a ‘real’ conference.

  • Provides a familiar platform for new electronic networkers.

  • Some freeware packages available.

 

The weaknesses of virtual conferencing:

 

  • Need to spend considerable time on-line.

  • Need to have high level of groupware skills.

  • Need programming access to a server.

 

VIDEO CONFERENCING

 

Video conferencing is a discussion between two or more groups of people who are in different places but can see and hear each other using electronic communications. Pictures and sound are carried by the telecommunication network and such conferences can take place across the world.

 

The strengths of video conferencing:

 

  • Useful in communicating visual data.

  • Works well in one-to-many situations.

 

The weaknesses of video conferencing:

 

  • High quality is still expensive.

  • People are often intimidated by their own image.

 

COMMUNITY TECHNOLOGIES

 

A number of organisations are moving toward the community of practice area by expanding on their basic software facilities. Some may even claim they already have all it takes. Still, the market is in an early phase, with many products focusing on one or more aspects of the whole picture. At this point, it is more

productive to assume that no one is really there and that ideal systems will arise from combinations and convergence in the market as it matures.

 

The most common on-line facilities that communities of practice can use include:

 

  • A home page to assert their existence and describe their domain and activities. 

  • A conversation space for on-line discussions of a variety of topics.

  • A facility for floating questions to the community or a subset of the community.

  • A directory of membership with some information about their areas of expertise in the domain.

  • In some cases, a shared workspace for synchronous electronic collaboration, discussion, or meeting.

  • A document repository. 

  • A search engine good enough for them to retrieve things they need from their knowledge base. 

  • Community management tools, mostly for the coordinator but sometimes also for the community at large, including the ability to know who is participating actively, which documents are downloaded, how much traffic there is, which documents need updating, etc.

  • The ability to spawn sub-communities, subgroups, and project teams. 

  • Furthermore, a technological platform for communities of practice should ideally be: 

  • Easy to learn and use because communities of practice are usually not people’s main job. 

  • Easily integrated with the other software that members of the community are using for their regular work so that participation in the community requires as few extra steps as possible.

  • Not too expensive. If it requires a lot of investment up front, potentially useful communities will not be able to take advantage of the platform. Indeed, many communities start with only a partial understanding of the value they will provide eventually.