1 / 19

Investigation of Information Retrieval Accuracy from Knowledge Management Systems

Investigation of Information Retrieval Accuracy from Knowledge Management Systems. Ryan C. LaBrie Department of Information Systems W. P. Carey School of Business Arizona State University. Agenda. Motivation Theory Measurement Method Other Issues. Motivation Conceptual framework

uta
Download Presentation

Investigation of Information Retrieval Accuracy from Knowledge Management Systems

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Investigation of Information Retrieval Accuracy from Knowledge Management Systems Ryan C. LaBrie Department of Information Systems W. P. Carey School of Business Arizona State University

  2. Agenda • Motivation • Theory • Measurement • Method • Other Issues

  3. Motivation • Conceptual framework • Literature Review • Research model • Research method • Hypotheses • Data • Measurement • Implications

  4. Motivation • Strategic importance of IT Standards • Lack of IT Standards research in IS area • Little empirical treatment on IT Standards research • Unbalanced research emphasis

  5. Research Question • How are IT Standards created and formalized as a Knowledge Product for the community served? • What group dynamics drive Standards Organizations in their pursuit of the development of IT Standards? • Explore factors that impact IT Standards Setting Process in Web-based industry consortia. • Explore the relationship between the factors and group dynamics focusing on individual and thematic centrality. • Examine the transition of the centrality over different stages of standards setting process.

  6. IT Standards • Emphasis • Economic/Strategic focus • Technical focus • Organizational focus • Theoretical Treatment • Game theory • Installed base • Switching cost (Klemperer, 1987) • Lock-in (David, 1985) • Network externalities (Katz & Shapiro, 1985) • First mover advantage, RBV

  7. IT Standards Organizations • Formal Standards Development Organization • Highest level of Standards Setting • de jure Standards • ISO, ITU, IEEE and so on • Participation is internationally recognized • Standards-oriented Industry Consortia • National Cooperative Research Act (1984) • de facto Standards • OASIS, HR-XML Consortium, • Industry specific • Use the Internet

  8. Conceptual Model Time Individual Centrality Group Heterogeneity (Proxy: Group composition) People- focused analysis People- focused analysis email data Standards Type (Infrastructure vs. Business process oriented) Theme- focused analysis Theme- focused analysis Thematic Centrality

  9. Group Environment • Electronic Communities of Practice • Communities of Practice (CoP) (Wenger, 1990; Lave and Wenger, 1990; Brown and Duquid, 1991) • A group of experts with Informal, work-related social relationship • Important for knowledge sharing and creation • (Alavi and Leidner, 2001). • The emergence of electronic or online CoP due to the Internet • IT Standards Development in Online Knowledge Communities (OKCs) • Open Source Software (OSS) Development • “The Cathedral and the Bazaar” (Raymond, 1999): • Proprietary software development versus OSS project

  10. Group Heterogeneity • Group Size • Very large-scale conversation (100~200 participants) • As group size increases, problem-solving becomes more efficient until some optimal size is reached (Shaw, 1981; • Dennis et al., 1990) – the Law of Diminishing Returns • Use of Computer-Mediated Communication • Help increase the size of a group (increase heterogeneity) • Help reduce social queues, making OKCs more task-oriented • Tends to cut across organizational boundaries, breaking down hierarchies (Kiesler 1986; McGrath, 1990) • Group Heterogeneity • Large participants often leads to heterogeneity, which might cause low degrees of centrality • The more numbers of participants, the lesser the centrality. • Proxy: Group composition - Vendor and end-user organizations

  11. Standards Types • Infrastructure-oriented IT Standards • A group of core technologies to form a technical framework that provides an infrastructure on which organizations can perform business transactions. • Compatibility is emphasized. • Requires input from a lot of human resources • Work best in decentralized organizational structure • Business process-oriented IT Standards • The documented agreements that define procedures for horizontal and vertical business transactions performed over the Internet. • Feasibility is emphasized. • Requires central authority to collate multiple solutions • Work best in centralized organizational structure

  12. Group Process: Dynamic Centrality • Individual Centrality in Social Network • The extent to which the individual is linked to others in the group: Central individuals exchange messages with a large number of members in a group • Thematic Centrality in Semantic Network • The extent to which the theme or topic is linked to others in the discussion. Central themes or topics emerge much more times than less central themes. • Why Dynamic? • A standards setting process is a sequential and iterative process consisting of distinct stages such as standards draft proposal, adaptation through feedback, and adoption of standards (Marpet, 1998). • Not every group displays the same pattern over time: Poole’s (1983) contingency model of group development - Stages of standardization process as breakpoints

  13. Research Method Step 1. Social Network Analysis (social and semantic network) Step 2. Factorial Design: 2 X 2 ANOVA design (Standards type X Group Heterogeneity) Standards Type Business process oriented Infrastructure oriented I (++) II(-+) Time: Standards setting process Centrality (Individual and Thematic) Centrality (Individual and Thematic) Low Group Heterogeneity III(+-) IV(--) Centrality (Individual and Thematic) Centrality (Individual and Thematic) High

  14. Assumptions • Tasks are successfully implemented. • The individual centrality is positively related with the individual performance (Ahuja et al., 2003), and Individual performance tends to be consistent with group performance. • In OKCs, thematic centrality generally overpowers individual centrality. • CMC helps reduce social queues, making OKCs more task-oriented • CMC tends to cut across organizational boundaries, breaking down • hierarchies (Kiesler 1986; McGrath, 1990)

  15. Hypotheses H1: Creation of infrastructure oriented IT standards is negatively related to both individual and thematic centrality. H2: Creation of business process oriented IT standards is positively related to both individual and thematic centrality. H3: Increase in heterogeneity of a group is negatively related to both individual and thematic centrality. H4: Decrease in heterogeneity of a group is positively related to both individual and thematic centrality. H5: Creation of infrastructure oriented IT standards in a high heterogeneous environment is negatively related to both individual and thematic centrality. H6: Creation of business process oriented IT standards in a low heterogeneous environment is positively related to both individual and thematic centrality. H7: Variability of the centrality will decrease over time. H8: Individual centrality will be less stronger, while the thematic centrality will become more stronger over time.

  16. No Project Team No. of Participant No. of Email Member Non-Member By Member By Non-Member Total 1 Transport, Routing & Packaging 24 (13%) 160 (87%) 1,908 (56%) 1,507 (44%) 3,415 2 Core Components 8 (4%) 175 (96%) 603 (38%) 995 (62%) 1,598 3 Registry and Repository 4 (4%) 105 (96%) 481 (35%) 875 (65%) 1,356 4 Business Process Methodology 12 (9%) 125 (91%) 806 (63%) 483 (37%) 1,289 5 Technical Architecture 22 (15%) 123 (85%) 648 (52%) 610 (48%) 1,258 6 Marketing Awareness 7 (9%) 75 (91%) 131 (33%) 267 (67%) 398 7 ebXML Requirement 12 (15%) 67 (85%) 247 (82%) 54 (18%) 301 Data • Email archives from ebXML, DocBook, and Business Transaction

  17. Measurement • Standards Types • Degree of technical specification • Industry standards • Group Heterogeneity • Use group composition as proxy • Proportion of vendor and end-user organizations in a group • Individual Centrality • Degrees, Betweenness, and Closeness • Social Network Analysis Software (Social Network) • Thematic Centrality • Count of appearance of the theme • Social Network Analysis Software (Semantic Network)

  18. Implications • For practitioners • Understanding IT standards setting process in Web-based industry consortia • For researchers • Understanding the group dynamics of collaborative decision making process in Online Knowledge Communities

  19. Thank you for your time. Questions, comments? ryan.labrie@asu.edu www.public.asu.edu/~rlabrie

More Related