Al-Ghassani, A M; Kamara, J M; Anumba, C J and Carrillo, P M (2006) Prototype system for knowledge problem definition. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 132(5), pp. 516-524. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Attitudes to knowledge management (KM) have changed considerably as organizations are now realizing its benefits. Implementation, however, has been facing serious difficulties attributed either to not being able to anticipate the barriers when planning KM strategies or to using inappropriate methods and tools for implementation. These difficulties are more critical in construction due to the fragmented nature of the industry. This paper suggests that proper definition of a KM problem at the early stages of developing the KM initiatives will result in better control over the KM barriers. A methodology for identifying KM problems within a business context is then introduced. The methodology is encapsulated into a prototype software system, which facilitates its deployment in organizations and provides online help facilities. The methodology, development, operation, and evaluation of the prototype are described. The paper concludes that the prototype offers considerable potential for delivering a clarified KM problem and a distilled set of issues for an organization to address. This represents a significant first step in any KM initiative.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | information management; information technology; knowledge-based systems |
| Index terms: | knowledge-based system, implementation, prototype, strategy, information technology, knowledge management, methodology |
| Subjects: | computing systems, modelling and simulation, artificial intelligence, contractual arrangements, research methods, management, professional development |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Research Practice, Procurement, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 CT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here