Knowledge ArchitectureProcess & Case Studies

Tom ReamyChief Knowledge Architect

KAPS Group

Knowledge Architecture Professional Services

http://www.kapsgroup.com

2

Agenda

Introduction

KA and Library Science– Taxonomy Development– Expertise Location, Collaboration

Tale of Two Taxonomies – Best of Times and Worst of Times

Conclusion

3

Taxonomy Development Process

Foundation – Strategic & Business Context– Info problems, political environment – support, special

interests Knowledge Architecture Audit – Knowledge Map Taxonomy Strategy/Model – forms, technology, people

– Existing taxonomic resources, software Draft Taxonomy

– Information Interviews, focus groups, card sorts– Content Analysis, top down & bottom up– Refine, feedback, pilot app

Taxonomy Plans – Governance, Maintenance, Applications

4

Knowledge Architecture Audit:Knowledge MapProject Foundation

Contextual Interviews

Information

Interviews

App/Content

Catalog

User Survey Strategy

Document

Meetings, work groups

Overview

High Level:

Process

Community

Info behaviors of Business processes

Technology and content

All 4 dimensions

Meetings, work groups

General Outline

Broad Context

Deep Details

Deep Details

Complete Picture

New

Foundation

5

Taxonomy Development Process:Progressive RefinementTaxonomy Model

Information

Interviews

Content Analysis

Refine Map Community

Governance Plan

Buy/Find work groups

Overview

Info behaviors, Card Sorts

Bottom Up Prototypes

Interviews Evaluate

Refine Interviews

Develop, Refine

General Outline

Preliminary Taxonomy

Taxonomy 1.0

Taxonomy 1.0-1.9

Tax 2.0 Taxonomy

6

Taxonomy Development:Taxonomy Model

Enterprise Taxonomy– No single subject matter taxonomy – Need an ontology of facets or domains

Standards and Customization– Balance of corporate communication and departmental specifics– At what level are differences represented?– Customize pre-defined taxonomy – additional structure, add

synonyms and acronyms and vocabulary

Enterprise Facet Model:– Actors, Events, Functions, Locations, Objects, Information

Resources– Combine and map to subject domains

7

Taxonomy Development: Process

Combination of top down and bottom up (and Essences)– Top: Design an ontology, facet selection – Bottom: Vocabulary extraction – documents, search logs,

interview authors and users– Develop essential examples (Prototypes)

• Most Intuitive Level – genus (oak, maple, rabbit)• Quintessential Chair – all the essential characteristics, no more

– Work toward the prototype and out and up and down– Repeat until dizzy or done

Map the taxonomy to communities and activities– Category differences– Vocabulary differences

8

Taxonomy DevelopmentEvaluate and Refine

Formal Evaluation– Quality of corpus – size, homogeneity, representative– Breadth of coverage – main ideas, outlier ideas– Structure – balance of depth and width– Evaluate speciation steps – understandable and systematic

• Person – Unwelcome person – Unpleasant person - Selfish person

Facetize a formal taxonomy– Look for duplications

• Example - Methods – chemistry, physics, social studies

9

Taxonomy Development: Evaluate and Refine

Practical Evaluation– Test in real life application– Select representative users and documents– Test node labels with Subject Matter Experts

• Balance of making sense and jargon

– Test with representative key concepts– Test for un-representative strange little concepts that only

mean something to a few people but the people and ideas are key and are normally impossible to find

10

Enterprise Environment – Case Studies

A Tale of Two Taxonomies – It was the best of times, it was the worst of times

Basic Approach– Initial meetings – project planning– High level K map – content, people, technology– Contextual and Information Interviews– Content Analysis– Draft Taxonomy – validation interviews, refine– Integration and Governance Plans

11

Enterprise Environment – Case One – Taxonomy, 7 facets

Taxonomy of Subjects / Disciplines:– Science > Marine Science > Marine microbiology > Marine toxins

Facets:– Organization > Division > Group– Clients > Federal > EPA– Instruments > Environmental Testing > Ocean Analysis > Vehicle– Facilities > Division > Location > Building X– Methods > Social > Population Study– Materials > Compounds > Chemicals– Content Type – Knowledge Asset > Proposals

12

Enterprise Environment – Case One – Taxonomy, 7 facets

Project Owner – KM department – included RM, business process

Involvement of library - critical Realistic budget, flexible project plan Successful interviews – build on context

– Overall information strategy – where taxonomy fits Good Draft taxonomy and extended refinement

– Software, process, team – train library staff– Good selection and number of facets

Final plans and hand off to client

13

Enterprise Environment – Case Two – Taxonomy, 4 facets

Taxonomy of Subjects / Disciplines:– Geology > Petrology

Facets:– Organization > Division > Group– Process > Drill a Well > File Test Plan– Assets > Platforms > Platform A– Content Type > Communication > Presentations

Issues– Not enough facets– Wrong set of facets – business not information– Ill-defined facets – too complex internal structure

14

Enterprise Environment – Case Two – Taxonomy, 4 facets

Environment Issues– Value of taxonomy understood, but not the complexity

and scope– Under budget, under staffed– Location – not KM – tied to RM and software

• Solution looking for the right problem

– Importance of an internal library staff– Difficulty of merging internal expertise and taxonomy

15

Enterprise Environment – Case Two – Taxonomy, 4 facets

Project Issues– Project mind set – not infrastructure– Wrong kind of project management

• Special needs of a taxonomy project

Research Issues– Not enough research – and wrong people– Misunderstanding of research – wanted tinker toy connections

• Interview 1 implies conclusion A

16

Taxonomy DevelopmentConclusion: Risk Factors

Political-Cultural-Semantic Environment – Not simple resistance - more subtle

• – re-interpretation of specific conclusions and sequence of conclusions / Relative importance of specific recommendations

Understanding project scope Access to content and people

– Enthusiastic access

Importance of a unified project team– Working communication as well as weekly meetings

17

Conclusion: Lessons for Librarians

Size Matters – but bigger is not better No single enterprise taxonomy Faceted taxonomies – expose different parts to different

groups Corporate taxonomies are not like Dewey decimal system

– Taxonomy not a classification– Smaller – easier to use– Get breadth of coverage with facets not single subject

taxonomy

18

Conclusion: Lessons for LibrariansInformation Architecture Lessons Focus on user

– Developing classification for novice and infrequent user– Usability – develop understanding and different relationships

– continuous monitoring and refining

No right way to categorize – understand variations There is no shelf – equal numbers of categories not books

in each category Focus on applications and usability

19

Conclusion: Lessons for LibrariansExpand You World Cognitive Science

– Modeling how people think, categorize

Business Activities– Information behaviors within context of business acitvities

Technology– CM – metadata – standards and implementation– Search – facets + taxonomy + best bets +– Text Analytics – learn to develop categorization rules– Taxonomy Management Software - necessary

20

General Conclusion: Taxonomy Development

Taxonomy development is not just a project– It has no beginning and no end

Taxonomy development is not an end in itself– It enables the accomplishment of many ends

Taxonomy development is not just about search or browse– It is about language, cognition, and applied intelligence

Strategic Vision (articulated by K Map) is important – Even for your under the radar vocabulary project

Paying attention to theory is practical– So is adapting your language to business speak

21

General Conclusions – KA and Library

Knowledge Architecture – new foundation for KM– Key is models of knowledge

Knowledge Architecture – new direction for librarians– A Key is expanding into the organization – business value– A Key is focus on users – IA + cognitive science

Big Issues:– External and Internal resources– balance of partnering and extending each group

Knowledge Architecture is a bridge between KM and Library Science

Questions?

Tom Reamytomr@kapsgroup.com

KAPS Group

Knowledge Architecture Professional Services

http://www.kapsgroup.com