Ontology based Knowledge Transferability and Complexity Measurement for Knowledge Sharing

Pornpit Wongthongtham, Behrang Zadjabbari

Abstract

Importance of knowledge sharing raises the issue of how organizations can effectively encourage individual knowledge sharing behaviour and what factors enable promote or hinder sharing of knowledge. It is important to explore the factors affecting knowledge sharing and remove barriers to participation in knowledge sharing. Willingness and ability to share knowledge and willingness and ability of receiver to achieve knowledge are one of key issues in knowledge sharing. Knowledge sharing also depends on knowledge context including the nature, definition, and properties of knowledge which influence the ease with which knowledge can be shared. In this research the context of knowledge is defined by two key variables i.e. transferability and complexity which are subject of this paper. Ontologies are used mainly to provide a shared semantically domain knowledge in a declarative formalism. Ontology specifies consensual knowledge. In this paper, ontology is applied to explore knowledge context. It is then used to measure transferability of knowledge between individuals from different backgrounds by comparing the similarity of their ontologies. Then the difference of the ontologies is measured its complexity in order to determine how complicated of new knowledge being shared. Ontologies are used mainly to provide a shared semantically domain knowledge in a declarative formalism. Ontology specifies consensual knowledge. In this paper, ontology is applied to explore knowledge context. It is then used to measure transferability of knowledge between individuals from different backgrounds by comparing the similarity of their ontologies. Then the difference of the ontologies is measured its complexity in order to determine how complicated of new knowledge being shared.

References

  1. Andrew, B.-J., C. S. Veda, et al. (2005). "A semiotic metrics suite for assessing the quality of ontologies." Data Knowl. Eng. 55(1): 84-102.
  2. Anthony, M. O., Y. Haining, et al. (2006). "Coupling Metrics for Ontology-Based Systems." IEEE Softw. 23(2): 102-108.
  3. Anthony, M. O., Y. Haining, et al. (2007). "Indicating ontology data quality, stability, and completeness throughout ontology evolution: Research Articles." J. Softw. Maint. Evol. 19(1): 49-75.
  4. Argote, L., B. Mcevily, et al. (2003). "Managing knowledge in organizations:An integrative framework and review of emerging themes." Management Science 49(4): 571-582.
  5. Babcock, P. (2004). Shedding light on knowledge management. HR Magazine 49: 46-50.
  6. Bakker, M., R. T. A. J. Leenders, et al. (2006). "Is trust really social capital? Knowledge sharing in product development projects." The Learning Organization 13: 594-605.
  7. Connelly, C. E. and E. K. Kelloway (2003). "Predictors of employees' perceptions of knowledge sharing cultures." Leadership & Organization Development Journal 24: 294-301.
  8. Cummings, J. N. (2004). "Work groups, structural diversity, and knowledge sharing in a global organization." Management Science 50(3): 352-364.
  9. Davenport, T. H. and L. Prusak (2003). Working knowledge: How organization manage what they know, Harvard Business School Press.
  10. Dazhou, K., X. Baowen, et al. (2004). A complexity measure for ontology based on UML. Distributed Computing Systems, 2004. FTDCS 2004. Proceedings. 10th IEEE International Workshop on Future Trends of.
  11. DeLong, D. W. and L. Fahey (2000). "Diagnosing cultural barriers to knowledge management." Academy of Management Executive 14(4): 113-127.
  12. Dodgson, M. (1993). "Learning, trust and technological collaboration." Human Relations 46(1): 77-95.
  13. Doney, P. M. and J. P. Cannon (1997). "An examination of the nature of trust in Buyer-Seller relationships." Journal of Marketing 61: 35-51.
  14. Drummond, N., M. Horridge, et al. (2007). "Pizza Ontologyv1.5" Retrieved May 31, 2010, from http://www.co-ode.org/ontologies/pizza/2007/02/12/.
  15. Gruber, T. R. (1993). Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing. International Workshop on Formal Ontology in Conceptual Analysis and Knowledge Representation, Padova, Italy, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Deventer, The Netherlands.
  16. Heffernan, T. (2004). "Trust formation in cross-cultural business to business relationships." Qualitative research-An international Journal 7: 114-125.
  17. His, I. (2004). Analyzing the Conceptual Coherence of Computing Applications through Ontological Excavation PhD Thesis Proposal.
  18. Jap, S. D. (2001). "The strategic role of the saleforce in developing customer satisfaction across the relationship." The Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management 21: 95-109.
  19. Kankanhalli, A., B. C. Y. Tan, et al. (2005). "Contributing knowledge to electronic knowledge repositories: An empirical investigation." MIS Quarterly 29(1): 113-143.
  20. Kashyap, V. and A. Sheth (1998). Semantic Heterogeneity in Global Information Systems: The Role of Metadata, Context, and Ontologies. London, UK, Academic Press.
  21. Matzler, K., B. Renzl, et al. (2008). "Personality traits and knowledge sharing." Journal of economic pcychology 29: 301-313.
  22. Mena, E., A. Illarramendi, et al. (2000). "OBSERVER: An Approach for Query Processing in Global Information Systems Based on Interoperation across Preexisting Ontologies." Distributed and Parallel Databases 8(2): 223-271.
  23. Mungall, C. (2005). Increased complexity in the GO, BDGP / GO Consortium.
  24. Nonaka, I. and H. Takeuchi (1995). The knowledge creation company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation, New York: Oxford University Press.
  25. Ojha, A. K. (2005). "Impact of team demography on knowledge sharing in software project teams." South Asian Journal of Management 12: 67-78.
  26. Pease, A., I. Niles, et al. (2002). The Suggested Upper Merged Ontology: A Large Ontology for the Semantic Web and its Applications. the AAAI-2002 Workshop on Ontologies and the Semantic Web, Edmonton, Canada.
  27. Preece, J. (2004). "Etiquette, Empathy and Trust in Communities of Practice: Stepping-Stones to Social Capital." Journal of Universal Computer Science 10(3): 294-302.
  28. Rodriguez, M. A. and M. J. Egenhofer (2003). "Determining semantic similarity among entity classes from different ontologies." IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.
  29. Saraydar, C., N. B. Mandayam, et al. (2002). "Efficient power control via pricing in wireless data networks." IEEE Trans. Commun. 50(2): 291-303.
  30. Stuckenschmidt, H. and I. J. Timm (2002). Adapting communication vocabularies using shared ontologies. the Second International Workshop on Ontologies in Agent Systems, Bologna, Italy.
  31. Wang, J. Z. and F. Ali (2005). An efficient ontology comparison tool for semantic web applications. the 2005 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence (WI'05), IEEE.
  32. Wang, S. and R. A. Noe (2009). "Knowledge sharing: A review and directions for future research." Human Resource Management Review.
  33. Weinstein, P. and P. Birmingham, (1999). Comparing Concepts in Differentiated Ontologies. 12th Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition, Modeling, and Management., Banff, Canada.
  34. Wilson, T. and S. A. Jantrania (1993). Measuring value in relationship development. 9th IMP conference, Bath.
  35. Zhang, D., C. Ye, et al. (2006). An evaluation method for ontology complexity analysis in ontology evolution.
  36. Managing Knowledge in a World of Networks, 15th International Conference, EKAW 2006, Podebrady, Czech Republic.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Wongthongtham P. and Zadjabbari B. (2012). Ontology based Knowledge Transferability and Complexity Measurement for Knowledge Sharing . In Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing - Volume 1: KMIS, (IC3K 2012) ISBN 978-989-8565-31-0, pages 5-14. DOI: 10.5220/0004103600050014


in Bibtex Style

@conference{kmis12,
author={Pornpit Wongthongtham and Behrang Zadjabbari},
title={Ontology based Knowledge Transferability and Complexity Measurement for Knowledge Sharing},
booktitle={Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing - Volume 1: KMIS, (IC3K 2012)},
year={2012},
pages={5-14},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0004103600050014},
isbn={978-989-8565-31-0},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing - Volume 1: KMIS, (IC3K 2012)
TI - Ontology based Knowledge Transferability and Complexity Measurement for Knowledge Sharing
SN - 978-989-8565-31-0
AU - Wongthongtham P.
AU - Zadjabbari B.
PY - 2012
SP - 5
EP - 14
DO - 10.5220/0004103600050014