INTERPRETATION OF COLLABORATIVE DECISIONS BY META-METRICS

Norbert Gronau, Edzard Weber, Priscilla Heinze

Abstract

Knowledge is bound to person. It originates in persons and is used by persons. Knowledge can be based on data and information. It also represents a combination of classified experiences, values, context and expertise, which provides a framework for the evaluation of these experiences and information. Consolidated knowledge from multiple persons can, however, result in false outcomes, especially when values are transformed into metrics. Due to the occurring aggregation, particular information about person-specific differences in determining the overall assessment of a community is lost. Two similar assessments can be based on entirely different single evaluations, expertises or totalities. Hence, the assessment regarding their quality, balance and stability should be performed differently. Metrics about the initial data basis are necessary in order to provide interpretation aid. This paper introduces the meta-metrics for the interpretation of collaborative decision makings in communities of practice.

References

  1. Bechmann A (1991) Bewertungsverfahren - der handlungsbezogene Kern von Umweltverträglichkeitsprüfungen. In: Hübler K-H, Otto-Zimmermann K (Hrsg.) Bewertung der Umweltverträglichkeit - Bewertungsmaßstäbe und Bewertungsverfahren für die Umweltverträglichkeitsprüfung, 2. Auflage, Eberhard Blottner Verlag, Taunusstein
  2. Bechmann A (1998) Anforderungen an Bewertungsverfahren im Umweltmanagement -dargestellt am Beispiel der Bewertung für die UVP. Bericht 20, Institut für Synergetikund Ökologie (SYNÖK), Barsinghausen
  3. Chesbrough, H. W. (2003) Open Innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
  4. Davenport, T., Prusak, L., 1998. Wenn Ihr Unternehmen wüßte, was es alles weiß. Das Praxisbuch zum Wissensmanagement. Moderne Industrie, Landsberg.
  5. Globke W (2005) Software-Metriken. Moderne Softwareentwicklung, Universität Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe.
  6. Gronau, N., (2009) Wissen prozessorientiert managen. Methoden und Werkzeuge für die Nutzung des Wettbewerbsfaktors Wissen in Unternehmen. Oldenbourg, München.
  7. Gronau, N. (2010) Potsdamer WissensmanagementModell. In Enzyklopädie der Wirtschaftsinformatik. Oldenbourg, München, 4th edition. http://www. enzyklopaedie-der-wirtschaftsinformatik.de (Abruf: 8.10.2010).
  8. Hara, N. (2009) Communities of Practice. Fostering Peerto-Peer Learning and Informal Knowledge Sharing in the Work Place. Springer Verlag, Berlin.
  9. Iwin, A. A., (1975) Grundlage der Logik von Wertungen. Akademie Verlag, Berlin.
  10. Keilhau, W. (1923) Die Wertungslehre - Versuch einer exakten Beschreibung der ökonomischen Grundbeziehungen. Verlag Gustav Fischer, Jena.
  11. Kirsch, W. (1997) Die Handhabung von Entscheidungsproblemen : Einführung in d. Theorie der Entscheidungsprozesse 5th ed., Herrsching.
  12. Konda, S., Monarch, I., Sargent, P., Subrahmanian, E. (1992) Shared memory in design: A unifying theme for research and practice. Research in Engineering Design, 4(1), p.23-42.
  13. Lankes J, Matthes F, Wittenburg A (2005) Softwarekartographie als Beitragzum Architekturmanagement. In: Aier S, Schönherr M: Unternehmensarchitekturen und Systemintegration. GITO-Verlag, Berlin
  14. Lesser, E. L., Fontaine, M. A. (2004) Overcoming Knowledge Barriers with Communities of Practice: Lessons learned through practical experience. In: Knowledge Networks - Innovation through communities of practice, Idea Group Publishing, London, pp. 14-23.
  15. Mann H. B., Whitney D. R. (1947) On a Test of Whether one of Two Random Variables is Stochastically Larger than the Other, Ann. Math. Statist. Volume 18, Number 1 1947, 50-60, Ohio State University, Columbus
  16. Meixner O, Haas R. (2008) Wissensmanagement und Entscheidungsunterstützung. Eigenverlag Institut für Marketing und Innovation, Univ. f. Bodenkultur Wien, Wien
  17. Nonaka, I., Takeuchi, H. (1995) The knowledge-creating company: how Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation, Oxford University Express, New York.
  18. Saaty T. L. (2005) Theory and Applications of the Analytic Network Process: DecisionMaking with Benefits, Opportunities, Costs, and Risks. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh
  19. Surowiecki, J. (2004) The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many Are Smarter Than the Few and How Collective Wisdom Shapes Business, Economies, Societies and Nations. Doubleday.
  20. Von Hippel, E. (1994) “Sticky information” and the locus of problem solving: Implications for innovation. Management science, 40(4), p.429-439.
  21. Wenger, E., McDermott, R., Snyder, W.M. (2002) Cultivating Communities of Practice. Harvard Business School Press. Boston, Massachusetts.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Gronau N., Weber E. and Heinze P. (2011). INTERPRETATION OF COLLABORATIVE DECISIONS BY META-METRICS . In Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing - Volume 1: KMIS, (IC3K 2011) ISBN 978-989-8425-81-2, pages 158-166. DOI: 10.5220/0003639501580166


in Bibtex Style

@conference{kmis11,
author={Norbert Gronau and Edzard Weber and Priscilla Heinze},
title={INTERPRETATION OF COLLABORATIVE DECISIONS BY META-METRICS},
booktitle={Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing - Volume 1: KMIS, (IC3K 2011)},
year={2011},
pages={158-166},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0003639501580166},
isbn={978-989-8425-81-2},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing - Volume 1: KMIS, (IC3K 2011)
TI - INTERPRETATION OF COLLABORATIVE DECISIONS BY META-METRICS
SN - 978-989-8425-81-2
AU - Gronau N.
AU - Weber E.
AU - Heinze P.
PY - 2011
SP - 158
EP - 166
DO - 10.5220/0003639501580166