Ogni antibiotico è efficace in relazione a un determinato gruppo di microrganismi
comprare biaxin online in italiain caso di infezioni oculari vengono scelte gocce ed unguenti.
Microsoft word - loyola.ts.doc
Comparison of Approaches toward Formalising Context:
Implementation Characteristics and Capacities
William Loyola
Escuela de Postgrado en Administración de Empresas, Escuela Superior Politécnica del
Litoral, Guayaquil, Ecuador
[email protected] Abstract: Existing relevant literature regarding approaches to context formalisation is analysed in search of a
characterisation that explains the links - suggested by knowledge theory of the firm - between knowledge integration
capability and common knowledge types. The ontological and the syntactic-semantic-pragmatic continuum approaches
reveal an extensive description of context, which contributes to the understanding of the knowledge integration process,
and to an eventual operationalisation of common knowledge types. This theoretical development opens possibilities for
the elaboration of prescriptive models that support the integration of knowledge during routine operations of the
organisation.
Keywords: knowledge integration, common knowledge, context formalisation
1. Common knowledge in
and enables the sharing and integration of the
management
aspects of their knowledge that are not common to all of them. Common knowledge, here,
One relevant proposition of the knowledge-based
accepting these Deweyan pragmatic approaches,
theory of the firm is that the ability of an
is the kind of knowledge that makes members of
organisation to integrate existing knowledge
the organisation communicate well, avoid
builds up its competitive advantage. The capacity
misunderstandings, and be able to solve business
to integrate existing knowledge, not the
problems together.
knowledge itself, is emphasised here (Grant, 1996). Another theorist, Schendel (1996),
Grant (1996) goes further, he identifies different
proposes that developing new organisational
types of common knowledge and argues for a
knowledge creates competitive advantage. With a
positive relationship between the level and
different vocabulary, but referring to same
sophistication of common knowledge types -
concepts of organisational knowledge, March
common language, shared meaning, and
(1991) and Spender (1992) refer to "knowledge
recognition of individual knowledge domains - and
exploitation" as the application of existing
the efficiency of the knowledge integration
knowledge to deliver goods and services and to
process, In spite of Grant's convincing arguments
"knowledge exploration" as the generation of new
it is problematic to understand and corroborate
knowledge. According to all of these theorists,
such relationships given the broad scope of the
there is a consensus that knowledge is a key
independent variables: common language, shared
component of organisational capability, whether in
meaning and recognition of individual knowledge
the exploration or exploitation approach. This
domains. To my best of knowledge, considering
work will elaborate on the knowledge exploitation
this pragmatic view, a set of operational measures
approach. The postulate that integration of
have not been proposed nor tested to support or
existing knowledge to deliver goods and services
not the theory. This paper looks into existing
in organisations relies upon common knowledge
approaches to context for the understanding of
for their undertakings is voiced by Grant (1996). In
these common knowledge types with the purpose
this same line, Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) refer
of giving them a tractable and consistent scope.
to common knowledge as "redundancy" that allows a loose coupling among members of a group. In the communications literature Cramton
2. Common knowledge and context
(2001) refers to "mutual knowledge" as the
While organisational common knowledge is
knowledge that the communicating parties share
described as the common collective knowledge of
in common and know they share (Krauss and
the members of an organisation, the reference
Fussell 1990), that is the "common ground"
domain to which this knowledge is common has
integral to the coordination of actions (Clark,
been admitted as a tacit issue but without
1996). Grant adds that common knowledge is
adequate explanation. Common knowledge is
constituted by those elements of knowledge that
common in regards to what is widely shared
are common to the members of an organisation;
among members of a group, community or
namely, the intersection of their knowledge sets
organisation: their context, their environment.
Academic Conferences Ltd
Reference this paper as: Loyola W. (2007) "Comparison of Approaches toward Formalising Context: Implementation Characteristics and Capacities"
The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management Volume 5 Issue 2, pp 203 - 214, available online at www.ejkm.com
Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management Volume 5 Issue 2 2007 (203 - 214)
Here, the idea of "context" is chosen over
Modelling Survey" provided the elements to
"environment" given that it denotes a stronger link
assemble a schema for the understanding and
to language and meaning than the idea of
evaluation of approaches. Representative
"environment". So, in advocating for an approach
proposals for each model are described and
for understanding the knowledge integration
critically evaluated from the common knowledge
process in organisations it is necessary to
type perspective (see Table 1).
understand the domain to which common knowledge types - common language, shared
Key-Value Model, (Schilit et al, 1994) allows a
meaning, and recognition of individual knowledge
basic representation of context. The most it can
domains - belong to; that is, the understanding of
be expected from it, a structure that offers an
"context" in organisations. Conceptualisations of
identifier and its value for each element
knowledge in organisations (Davenport and
constituting context, is the capacity to share a list
Prusak, 1998; Bell, 1999; Tsoukas and
of terms related to a situation or event (a basic
Vladimirou, 2001) (see section 4) include context
form of common language). Markup Schema
as key part of their explanations and even they
Model (Held et al, 2002) allows publishing of an
denote a role to it. However they do not elaborate
inventory of elements related to a context by
on the definition of the concept, neither in its
means of tags and associated attributes following
specification. In such situation, considerations to
a schema that describes context structure (a
the general definitions of "context" are in order.
proxy to common language and a basic form of sharing meanings). This approach separates
The Webster's English Dictionary tell us that
context schema from its content; however new
context is a) "the parts of a discourse that
contextual relationships are complex to
surround a word or passage and can throw light
incorporate (it asks for markup language
on its meaning", and b) "the interrelated conditions
in which something exists or occurs". It is acceptable to conclude that these acceptations of
Object Oriented Model (Schmidt et al, 1999)
context relate to narratives, situations, and events,
exposes the properties – names and values – of a
their relations to its surroundings and the
context and relationships among properties – thru
possibility of inferring meanings from them. This
events and methods - following a class model that
starting point achieved to identify essential
describes context structure (a proxy to common
properties belonging to the concept of context,
language and a basic form of sharing meanings).
however they do not bring yet sufficient light to the
This approach separates context structure from its
problem of providing a tractable and consistent
content and allows reusability of existing context
scope to common knowledge types.
structures, however extensibility of a context structure is complex to achieve (it asks for object
3. Analysis of approaches toward
oriented programming knowledge). The main
formalising context
motivation for studying contexts in artificial intelligence is to approach the problem of
It is necessary at this point to look into existing
generality brought by McCarthy (1987). This
approaches to context in order to reveal how
problem is exemplified by McCarthy through a
context - the domain to which common knowledge
system that advise physicians on treating bacterial
is common - characterises common language,
infections of the blood and meningitis; system
shared meanings and recognition of individual
which has embedded rules for recommending two
knowledge domains. Context is a concept that has
weeks of tetracycline treatment and nothing else
called the attention of many disciplines -
to a patient case that has cholera vibrio in his
philosophy, history, psychology, cognitive science,
intestines. These rules resulted in a case where
linguistics, information science, organisational
patient would die long before the bacteria are
sciences, artificial intelligence - and there is even
gone due to the diarrhoea. The traditional
an interdisciplinary conference dedicated to the
approach to correct this flaw would be to add a
modelling of context. However, the disciplines of
rule to specific cases so it considers the diarrhoea
information science and artificial intelligence are
symptom. As an alternative, a general approach is
the ones that have made the most significant
to incorporate patient contextual information –
contributions to its formalisation. This literature
including symptoms - so that the system can use
review will look into approaches to context that try
it for all cases. In this case, considering contexts
to formalise its externalisation, that is, its structure
explicitly ease the knowledge integration process.
and content. Three publications, Akman and Surav (1996) with "Steps toward Formalising Context", Brézillon (2002) with "Modelling and Using Context - Past, Present and Future" and finally Strang et al (2004) with "A Context
Academic Conferences Ltd
William Loyola
tation ch
pplications of a Contex
(1991) Varieties of contex
isting ap
Table 1. C
urak (1996
tative Rese
ation of C
Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management Volume 5 Issue 2 2007 (203 - 214)
Logic Model (McCarthy 1993; Barwise 1986;
The age of the patient is greater than 17
Guha 1991; Giunchiglia 1993; Attardi and Simi
1993; Shoham 1991; Buvac and Mason 1993)
The patient is an alcoholic,
approaches from artificial intelligences allow sharing of well formed propositions - first-order
Then: There is evidence that the organisms,
logic or modal logic - about context (a proxy to
which might be causing the infection, are
common language), consistent evaluation of
diplococcus-pneumoniae (.3) or Escherichia
contextual propositions (a proxy to share
coli (.2). In this case Brézillon (1999) points out
meanings) and identification of expertise
that clause 4 acts as a screening clause which
(recognition of individual knowledge domains).
sets the rule as valid in the context of an adult, it
However, with the exception of situated theory
is a constraining clause that does not arbitrate in
framework (Barwise 1986; Akman and Surav
the problem solving, it just define the applicable
1996), logic model asks that members of the
context. It should be obvious at this point that the
organisation have to decide by themselves what
Rule-based approach uses natural language
constitute a contextual proposition in order to
syntax in contrast with the mathematical syntax of
formalise a particular context. In the other hand,
the Logic Model approach. Context structure in
logic model using situated theory framework has
this approach is blended in, and described in
the advantage of offering a contextual schema
terms of the problems it helps to confine.
(time, location and participants) besides the
Contextual Graph Model (Pasquier, 2000;
capacity to add contextual propositions to the
Brézillon 2002) is proposed as a unifying
specific context. Logic Model approach merges in
framework that associates explanation, learning
the positions the structure and content of context,
and knowledge acquisition. The subjacent logic of
a model that makes new contextual relationships
contextual graphs resides in the classification of
complex to incorporate, especially if predicate
the knowledge needed for a decision to be made:
calculus is not part of the common knowledge of
a) Proceduralised context: "knowledge that is
the organisation. Rule-based model (Brézillon,
shared by those involved in the problem and is
1999) approach to context representation is
directly but tacitly used for the problem solving", b)
described by its well-known example of a
Contextual knowledge: "knowledge that is not
screening clause (Clancey, 1983), which
explicitly used but influences the problem solving"
succinctly exemplifies its implementation strategy.
and c) External knowledge: "knowledge that has
nothing to do with the current decision making
The infection which requires therapy is
step but is known by many of those involved" and
d) Context: the sum of all the knowledge possessed by the decision makers on the whole
Only circumstantial evidence is available for
task (Figure 1).
The type of meningitis is bacterial,
Based on this framework, Pasquier (2000)
(circles) become contextual nodes describing the
proposes a contextual graph to represent the
possible contextual issues of a specific event.
actions to carry out according to the context of an
Contextual graph represents the part of the
incident. This is an acyclic graph, in which the
context that has been proceduralised.
action nodes (rectangles) represent actions to
Proceduralised context is compiled knowledge
carry out to achieve a goal while the event nodes
that can be decompiled to explain its reasoning.
Academic Conferences Ltd
William Loyola
Cognitively speaking, the scarcity principle leads
systematically approached which is more likely to
to try to reuse well-known procedures as soon as
be part of common knowledge in organisations.
possible thru macro-action (MA rectangles) or sub-graphs (bigger rectangles).
In summary, the critical evaluation of the approaches from the common knowledge type
At first glance, contextual graph could be thought
perspective, reveals that: a) Key-Value Model
as a notation to draw incident workflows, but its
capacity is limited to share an inventory of terms
proposed framework, based on focal and
about situations or events without meanings
subsidiary knowledge (Polanyi, 1962) does
associated to them; b) Markup Schema Model
describe a knowledge externalisation model that
separates context structure form its content and
looks for customary incident handling thru the
allows sharing of a friendlier common lexicon thru
characterisation of context and embedded self
a pre-established context model; c) Object
explanation. A contextual graph is a prescriptive
Oriented Model has similar characteristics of
approach that helps the understanding of the level
previous model but differs in that context structure
and sophistication of all common knowledge
extensions requires object oriented programming
types; however it requires incident by incident
knowledge; d) Logic Model offers proxies to the
context structuring. Finally, Ontology model
three common knowledge types but dealing with
(Otzturk and Aamodt, 1997; Strang et al, 2003) is
the context structure and content ask for a not
an information systems approach to context
very common knowledge language for
formalisation. Ontology, as described by Smith
management: predicate calculus; e) Rule-based
(2003), is the inventory of relevant entities of a
Model has similar characteristics of the previous
domain externalised as a vocabulary of the terms
model but with a natural language interface, yet
that denote these entities with their commonly
still blends context structure and content which
accepted, concise and unambiguous definitions.
prevents the sharing of context; f) Contextual
The formalisation of the vocabulary varies from
Graph model is a knowledge theory based
loosely expressed in natural language to
prescriptive model which provides a notation to
meticulously defined terms with formal semantics
draw incident workflows that incorporates
recurring to first-order logic or modal logic
contextual information and helps in the
(Uschold and Gruninger 1996). In this sense, the
understanding of the common knowledge types,
Ontology Model to organisational context argues
however it requires incident by incident context
for a syntactic and semantic standardisation of
structuring; and finally the g) Ontology Model,
shared and consensual knowledge structures (a
which is a general purpose model characterised
proxy to common language and shared meanings)
by a meta-structure that describes syntactic and
related to corporate competencies (Vasconcelos
semantic sides of context, separation of context
et al, 2000) to describe everyday information
structure and content, and a systematic and not
(Strang et al, 2003).
necessarily technological implementation approach. The reviewed approaches to context
These knowledge structures, proposed as
formalisation offer different levels of
taxonomies, have differences within in their
characterisation to common knowledge types;
composition, however general consensus in some
however the ontological approach provides the
characteristics of the taxonomy of real objects
most descriptive capacity and consistent scope
exists (Chandrasekaran et al, 1999): 1) there are
given its structure (guidelines for context
objects in the world, 2) objects have properties
taxonomies) and context content (procedures of
that can take values, 3) objects can exist in
various relations with each other, 4) properties and relations can change over time, 5) there are
4. Knowledge and context
events that occur at different time instants, 6)
there are processes in which objects participate and that occur over time, 7) the world and its
This section will work on conceptualisations that
objects can be in different states, 8) events can
argue in favour of characterising context as a
cause other events or states as effects, 9) objects
boundary object (Star, 1989). These
can have parts. Existing ontological models to
conceptualisations will help on the understanding
context (Otzturk and Aamodt, 1997; Strang et al,
of the links between common knowledge types
2003) show similar implementation characteristics
and knowledge integration capability. A boundary
than the Logical Model approach; however the
object, basically, is an artefact (physical or
ontology approach, in general, proposes an
mental) that allows members of different practices
abstraction layer by means of context taxonomy,
to share common grounds (Arias and Fischer,
and a context content mechanism which needs
2000). Boundary object supports the
not to be technologically approached but
distinguishing of differences but also provides
Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management Volume 5 Issue 2 2007 (203 - 214)
common points of reference (Harvey and
message destination as the effectiveness or
Chrisman, 1998).
pragmatic level. Even though Shannon and Weaver avoid much elaboration on the semantic
Knowledge management research makes use of
and pragmatic level of communication, these
the boundary object abstraction to explore the
three boundaries – syntactic, semantic and
interactions between knowledge and people.
pragmatic – have been referenced by several
Carlile's (2004) "integrative framework for
authors as a boundary framework for the analysis
managing knowledge across boundaries when
of data, information and knowledge,
innovation is desired" is one relevant research
correspondingly (Carlile, 2004; Boisot and Canals,
example that presents a case of an "automobile
2004). Carlile argues that in order to achieve
clay model", considered as boundary object, to
novelty different capabilities are needed at
explain the dynamics of the knowledge
different boundaries of communication. The
exploration approach. Carlile (2004) recalls
transferring capability asks for the development of
Shannon and Weaver (1949) seminal work on
common lexicon, it deals with the syntactic issues;
information theory, which describes the three
the translation capability takes care of semantic
levels of communication complexity. Shannon and
issues and asks for the development of common
Weaver relate the available repertoire of distinct
meanings and the transformation capability ask
symbols and their syntax - rules between symbols
for common interest, that is the pragmatic level
- to the syntactic or technical level of
(see Figure 2). Here, I am ready to accept
communication. Then, they identify the process by
Carlile's knowledge exploration framework and at
which symbols actually get meaning as the
the same time I argue for a search of a knowledge
semantic level; and finally, they consider the
exploitation (integration) framework linked to an
desired effect of a particular message on a
understanding of context as the boundary object.
Choosing to follow this theorising approach – the
relations to information, and states that knowledge
data-information-knowledge continuum – is not
is instrumental; but his definition of data does not
fortuitous; it involves the need to describe
tell us much. Davenport and Prusak (1998: 2)
domains and boundaries of common knowledge in
posit that "data is a set of discrete, objective facts
doing so it is necessary to consider the existing
about events" and that "Unlike data information
explanations regarding this continuum. Ackoff
has meaning" (1988: 4), and describe knowledge
(1989) defines data as "raw … it simply exists and
as "a fluid mix of framed experience, values,
has no significance beyond its existence … it can
contextual information, and expert insight that
exist in any form, usable or not … it does not have
provides a framework for evaluating and
meaning of itself" and posits that information is
incorporating new experiences and information. It
"data that has been given meaning by way of
originates and is applied in the minds of knowers"
relational connection . meaning can be useful,
(1988: 5). Davenport and Prusak suggest human
but does not have to be", and that knowledge is
involvement and relationships among data to
the application of data and information. Ackoff
define information – contextualised, categorised,
emphasises the assignment of semantics and
calculated, corrected, condensed - and at a
Academic Conferences Ltd
William Loyola
personal level they describe knowledge as an
the cyclic aspect of the continuum and show that
individual capability to capture more information.
the outcomes of information and knowledge
In a way, they describe knowledge as a
extraction depend on the effectiveness of human
complicated, and not very clear, mixture of
involvement. Analysing the assessments of this
processes that incorporates contextual
continuum, it can be argued that its description
information; but still data is not yet well described.
accomplishes the identification some basic
Davenport and Prusak also posit that knowledge
categories of data: items and events, which can
"In organisations, often becomes embedded not
be related to the interrogative primitives
only in documents or repositories but also in
"what/who" and "when/where" and that perception
organisational routines, processes, practices and
is the type of human involvement linked to data.
norms" (1988: 5). The position here is that
Boisot and Canals (2004) are explicit about
knowledge is personal and that Davenport and
perception when they posit that perceptual filters
Prusak are confusing knowledge with
guide the senses to certain types of stimuli and
representations of data and information.
only stimuli passing through this filter get registered as data.
Bell (1999) has a more integrated description of this continuum. He states that data is an ordered
The issue of perception involves a neural
sequence of given items and events, that
processing that takes place between the reception
information is a context-based arrangement of
of a stimulus and its sensing as data by an
items and their relations, and that knowledge is
individual (Kuhn, 1974). Appealing to Shannon
the judgment of the significance of events and
and Weaver (1949), it can be added that data is
items which comes from a particular context
registered using an agreed established symbolic
and/or theory. In the case of Bell's knowledge
repertoire and syntactic rules – alphabet,
definition it is revealing that a judgement of the
vocabulary and the language syntax rules (Boisot
significance of information can be based on
and Canals, 2004). So data is conditioned by
context and not only on theory. I will come back to
each individual's perceptual filters and at the
this issue later on. However, it is the work of
same time it is referenced by means of an agreed
Tsoukas and Vladimirou (2001) that stresses the
shared language – an inter-subjective objectivity
ideas behind this continuum. In their research
(Popper, 1959). But, where does this agreed
case at a customer care department at Greece's
shared repertory come from? Polanyi (1966)
leading telephone provider, the personnel at the
argues that our knowledge of the things denoted
customer care department were exposed in their
by words will have been largely acquired by
work to a lot of discrete items (names, addresses
experience – mental or physical; so these words
and phone numbers) and business rules (if
incorporated in discourses, or associated to
<problem> then <check this or that>) where their
situations or events were previous experiences in
use required a certain level of judgment; departing
the chain of perceptual filters and it's sensing. The
from here and by means of experience, operators
extension of the use of language when
discovered from verbal hints that they were
referencing data is mnemonic and syntactic, that
dealing with an unhappy or perplexed customer
is, we attach a name to each datum and use it
and acted according to the circumstances,
following syntax rules, but in order to name data a
adapting the business rules to the context of their
certain level of human involvement has to be
conversations. This case reveals that the level of
applied (Tsoukas and Vladimirou, 2001), we need
human involvement (Tsoukas and Vladimirou,
to discriminate between "this" and "that" (Dewey,
2001) – identifying phone numbers, selecting
1934). Then, the reference to data through
applicable business rules and adapting action to
language implies that data is part of a recurring
the particular context – explains the data-
process, as posited by Boisot and Canals (2004),
information-knowledge continuum and the
who propose that our perceptual filters are
relevance of context in this continuum.
affected by our existing knowledge.
In a different, but consistent, line of research,
Considering the achieved understanding of data
Boisot and Canals' (2004) proposal, after their
and the given acceptations of context, it could be
revision of information theory and social studies,
is consistent with the level of human involvement
Perceived context is data about the entities
identified by Tsoukas and Vladimirou (2001).
that have been sensed and filtered from a
Boisot and Canals (2004: 62) state that "Effective
discourse, situation or event – mental or
cognitive strategies extract information from data
physical experiences – by the individual,
and then convert it into knowledge. Effective
and referenced by a mnemonic and
cognitive and behavioural strategies vary from
syntactic common language via a process
agent to agent as a function of their situation, of
of discrimination; then, perceived context is
their prior individual knowledge …" making explicit
Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management Volume 5 Issue 2 2007 (203 - 214)
characterised as a sequence of the what,
earlier, for Ackoff (1989) knowledge is
who, when and where of experiences.
instrumental; Davenport and Prusak (1998)
Ackoff (1989) relates information to meaning;
describe knowledge as a capability for using
Davenport and Prusak (1998) suggest relations
experience, values, contextual information, and
between data to define information; Bell (1999)
expert insight, to evaluate new experiences and
links information to context-based interrelated
information. Tsoukas and Vladimirou (2001: 976)
data; and Boisot and Canals (2004) assert that
is a more enlightening reference work to depart
extracting information from data constitutes an
from, they dissect Bell's (1999) description of
interpretation of data according to some pre-
knowledge - the judgement of the significance of
established mental models. These descriptions
events and items and that this judgement can be
imply the individual capacity to discover relations
based on context and not only on theory – and
between data and assign meaning to them,
argue for incorporating the idea of "domain of
whether in reference to context or mental models
action" to propose a definition that states
or both. This latter assessment requires some
knowledge as the:
elaboration. Mental models theory (Byrne 1991)
"Individual capability to draw distinctions,
focuses on semantic procedures and explicit
within a domain of action, based on the
formal rules of inference and it has been tested
appreciation of context or theory, or both"
that context helps the finding of counterexamples
(Tsoukas and Vladimirou, 2001).
of presumed conclusions (Byrne, Espino and
This definition merits some consideration.
Santamaria, 1998); from here it can posited that
Tsoukas and Vladimirou (2001) supported in
one role of context is to assist formal mental
Polanyi (1962) and in a Wittgensteinian view,
models. In the other hand, there are theorists of
posit that to know how to act within a domain of
natural logic like Politzer and Braine (1991) who
actions is to make competent use of the
argue that the mind is provided with tacit rules of
distinctions constituting that domain.
Domain of
inference. They tested that changes in context
actions is a generalisation that refers in terms of
facilitate performance on conditional reasoning
organisations to the community of a specific
tasks; from here it can be posited that another role
scientific or professional practice. Within this
of context is to assist the tacit rules of inference.
specific domain – practice – is where the standard of knowledge is measured through theory and/or
Thus, the capacity to discover – infer – meaning
context. Social construction of reality (Schutz,
from data – in general - is principally guided by
1970; Berger and Luckmann, 1967) is brought to
formal explicit rules of inference and subsidised
our attention to argue in favour of context
by perceived context, and that in this discovery
equipped as theory - "we routinely bring to
meaning carries information. Complementarily, as
situations of interaction a tacit awareness of the
a subset, the capability to discover meanings from
normative expectations relevant to them and an
perceived context is principally guided by tacit
intuitive appreciation of the consequences that
rules of inference, and this discovery of meanings
might follow from breaking them" (McCarthy,
carries contextual information of a specific
1994: 65). Normative expectations and
experience – discourse, situation or event. "How"
consequences imply shared tacit propositions. It is
and "why" are posited as propositions that help to
in this ethnomethodological sense that context
describe the meanings discovered, establishing
supports the capacity to exercise judgement
relationships between the what, who when, and
(Tsoukas and Vladimirou, 2001). Anchoring on the
where of the data in general and perceived
knowledge propositions of Tsoukas and
context in particular.
Vladimirou (2001) and Boisot and Canals (2004),
Summing up, contextual information
which capture the most relevant arguments and
involves the inference of meanings from
criticisms regarding the data-information-
data of a specific experience; these
knowledge continuum, a subset definition of
meanings are discovered guided mainly by
knowledge is posited:
tacit rules of inference, base on the
Contextual knowledge
is the individual
interpretation of examples and
capability to exercise judgment and act
counterexamples. Namely, contextual
based on generalisations discovered mainly
information is characterised by the
by tacit rules of inference regarding a
interrelated what, who, when, where, how
domain of experiences – appreciation of
and why of a specific experience.
context; that is, based on the appreciation
Once that an understanding of context have been
of contextual information regarding a
established at the synthetic (perceived context)
domain of experiences; that is,
and semantic (contextual information) levels, the
characterised by the interrelated what, who
exploration of knowledge theories may shed light
when, where, how and why about a domain
on the pragmatic level of context. Recalling from
of experiences.
Academic Conferences Ltd
William Loyola
Contextual knowledge operates, using Polanyi´s
An ontological context
terms, as subsidiary knowledge, that is, subliminal
continuum approach to
and marginal cues that provide the context
knowledge integration
against which focal knowledge gets its shape (Polanyi, 1962). Summing up, while data and
Now, understanding context as continuum and
perceived context are related to discrimination
approaching its formalisation from an ontological
capacity and information and contextual
perspective allows retaking the understanding of
information are related to inference, knowledge
the knowledge integration process.
and contextual knowledge are related to judgment
Increasing the level and sophistication of
and action. Additionally and in particular, it can be
organisational common language is a
posit that while perceived context and contextual
syntactic issue that in terms of the context
information can be articulated given their syntactic
continuum ask for the articulation and sharing
and relational characteristics, contextual
of the what, who, when, where of
knowledge is tacit – given the tacit rules of
organisational repertories. This articulation is
inference – and corresponds to the domain of
the equivalent of a back-of-the-book index
what it cannot be easily articulated (Polanyi,
(Pepper, 2002) of what the organisation is
1962). Building upon recognising organisations as
about. Like in books, different type of
three things - historical social communities, real
taxonomies can be conceived, each
settings where individuals take action and sets of
comprising different organisational themes -
abstract rules - Tsoukas and Vladimirou (2001:
business lexicon, stakeholders, products
983) proposed a definition of organisational
concept, services concept, business
knowledge, which it is, assisted by the arguments
processes, and technology platforms. In each
regarding the context continuum, extended to
of these taxonomies there is a list of relevant
make explicit the role of context in organisations.
organisational terms and their synonyms. For each organisational term in the taxonomy
Organisational knowledge
is the capability
there are references to the occurrences of
that members of an organisation have
specific practice experiences – the "what,
developed to exercise judgment and act in
who, where and when" of specific
particular concrete contexts, by enacting
experiences. The described organisational
sets of generalisations (propositional
taxonomies closely represent the perceived
statements) based on the appreciation of
organisational context.
theory or historical evolved collective
Improving the level and sophistication of
understandings regarding experiences in
organisational shared meanings is a semantic
their practice
- which is based on the
issue that in terms of the context continuum
appreciation of context - or both.
asks for the discovery of propositions that
From the above definition it is feasible to describe
establish interrelationships among the
organisational contextual knowledge, a subset of
organisational terms of discourses,
the above description:
circumstances and events. It involves the
Organisational contextual knowledge
is the
identification of practice experiences revealed
subsidiary capability that members of an
as examples or counterexamples of such a
organisation have developed to exercise
relationship. Briefly, it includes a) propositions
judgment and act, in particular concrete
that interconnect - associate - topics of
contexts, by enacting sets of
organisational repertories – those taxonomies
generalisations discovered mainly by tacit
defined to increase the level of common
rules of inference, base on the appreciation
language, and b) the identification of the
of experiences in their practice; that is,
occurrences of practice experiences linked to
based on contextual information about their
the terms that participate in such association.
practice.
Facilitating the recognition of individual
This conceptual approach reveals an extensive
knowledge domains is a syntactic and
description of context, which is posited as a
semantic issue; it is related to who knows
subset related to the data -information -
what. In terms of perceived context, it calls for
knowledge continuum: perceived context –
a) the identification of organisational
contextual information – contextual knowledge.
stakeholders' roles and b) a categorised knowledge domain inventory. In terms of contextual information, it calls for propositions that associate the categories of the knowledge domain inventory with organisational stakeholders' roles. Briefly, this implies a mapping characterised by: a) knowledge domain taxonomies associated
Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management Volume 5 Issue 2 2007 (203 - 214)
with stakeholder taxonomies, and b) the
characterisation of a boundary object that explains
identification of occurrences of practice
the links between knowledge integration capability
experiences - what, who when, where – that
and the identified common knowledge types.
reveal examples and counterexamples of such association.
Among the reviewed models, the ontological
Integration of knowledge in products and
model, given its capacity to handle all common
services is a pragmatic issue mainly assisted
knowledge types and its general purpose context
by contextual knowledge, that is, it implies the
formalisation mechanism, was the selected
use of generalisations and execution of work
approach to elaborate on. The boundary objects
related activities base on the appreciation of
approach and the data-information-knowledge
contextual information.
continuum approach reveal: a) an extensive
These organisational taxonomies, their
description of context - a subset related to the
associations and the reference to occurrences of
syntactic-semantic-pragmatic continuum; b) a
practice experiences can be understand as the
continuum human involvement dependence: data
constituting characteristics of an ontological
and perceived context are related to
approach to the formalisation of context and
discrimination capacity and information and
provide a framework for the understanding of the
contextual information are related to inference,
link between common knowledge types and the
and knowledge and contextual knowledge are
efficiency of the knowledge integration capability
related to judgment and action. This ontological
and contribute to its eventual operationalisation.
contextual approach contributes to the understanding and eventual operationalisation of the knowledge integration process, as follows: 1)
6. Discussion and conclusion
organisational common language is a syntactic
Knowledge-base theory of the firm argues for a
issue that in terms of the context continuum
positive relationship between the level and
requires the articulation and sharing of the what,
sophistication of common knowledge types -
who, when, where of organisational repertories, 2)
common language, shared meaning and
organisational shared meanings is a semantic
recognition of individual knowledge domains,- and
issue that in terms of the context continuum
the efficiency of the knowledge integration
demands a) propositions that relate the topics of
process which have been proposed to have a link
organisational taxonomies and b) the identification
with the strategic advantage view. Considering
of the occurrences of practice experiences linked
that in this view, to the best of my knowledge,
to the terms that participate in such association; 3)
common knowledge types have not been tested
recognition of individual knowledge domains is a
or operationalised and that given the broad scope
syntactic and semantic issue; it is related to who
of these independent variables, this paper takes
knows what. In terms of perceived context, it
the challenge to elaborate on conceptual
requires a) the identification of organisational
specificity that allows the understanding and
stakeholders' roles and b) the identification of a
formalisation of an approach to common
categorised knowledge domain; 4) integration of
knowledge types that contributes to its eventual
knowledge in products and services is a
operationalisation. In this endeavour, it is
pragmatic issue mainly assisted by contextual
necessary to understand common knowledge and
knowledge. The ontological context continuum
their types, but in particular, it is essential to
approach to common knowledge does not only
achieve a characterisation of the domain in
configures a proxy to Grant's (1996) knowledge
regards to which "common knowledge" is
integration process – the case of the knowledge
common. This domain was identified as the
exploitation approach; but also it complements
organisational context and found that context
Carlile's (2004) integrative framework for
definition has been admitted as an obvious issue
managing knowledge across boundaries when
but without adequate explanation. Existing
innovation is desired - the case of the knowledge
relevant literature reviews regarding approaches
exploration approach. Finally, it opens possibilities
to context formalisation were considered in order
for the elaboration of prescriptive models that
to compare, analyse and reclassify the context
support the integration of knowledge during
approaches. This effort was a search for the
routine operations of the organisation.
References
Ackoff, R. L. (1989) From Data to Wisdom,
Journal of Applies Systems Analysis, Volume 16, pp. 3-9.
Akman, V. and Surav, M. (1996) Steps toward Formalising Context.
AI Magazine, 17(3), pp. 55-72.
Akman, V. and Surav, M. (1997) The use of situation theory in context modelling.
Computational Intelligence, 13, 3 (1997), 427–
Arias, E. and Fisher, G. (2000) Boundary Objects: Their Role in Articulating the Task at Hand and Making Information Relevant to
It.
International ICSC Symposium on Interactive and Collaborative Computing (ICC'2000), December.
Academic Conferences Ltd
William Loyola
Attardi, G. and Simi, M. (1993) A formalisation of viewpoints, TR-93-062,
International Computer Science Institute, Berkeley. Barwise, J. (1986) Conditionals and Conditional Information.
In On Conditionals, eds. E. C. Traugott, C. A. Ferguson, and J. S.
Reilly, 21–54. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Bell, D. (1999) The axial age of technology foreword: 1999´.
In The Coming of the Post Industrial Society. New York: Basic Books,
Special Anniversary Edition, ix-lxxxv.
Berger, P. and Luckman, T. (1967)
The Social Construction of Reality. Doubleday, New York. Boisot, M. and Canals, A. (2004) Data, information and knowledge: have we got it right? -
Journal of Evolutionary Economics,
Volume 14, pp. 43-67.
Brézillon, P. (1999) Context in human-machine problem solving: A survey.
Knowledge Engineering Review, 14, pp. 1-34. Brézillon, P. (2002) Modelling and Using Context: Past, Present and Future.
Research Report LIP6, Université Paris 6, France. Buvac, S., and Mason, I. A. (1993) Propositional Logic of Context.
Proceedings of the Eleventh National Conference on Artificial
Intelligence.
Byrne, R. M. J. (1991) Can valid inferences be suppressed?
Cognition, 39, pp. 71-78. Byrne, R. M. J., Espino, O., and Santamaria, C. (1998) Context can suppress inferences.
In A. C. Quelhas and F. Pereira (Eds.),
Cognition and context (pp. 201–214). Lisboa: Instituto Superior de Psicologia Aplicada.
Carlile, P (2004) Transferring, Transferring and Transforming: An Integrating Framework for Managing Knowledge across
Boundaries.
Organisation Science, Sep/Oct 15, 5, pp. 555.
Chandrasekaran, B., Josephson, J. and Benjamins V. (1999)
What Are Ontologies, and Why Do We Need Them? IEEE Intelligent
Systems, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 20-26.
Clancey, W. J. (1983) "The epistemology of a rule-based expert system: A framework for explanation"
Artificial Intelligence Journal
20(3) pp. 197-204.
Clark, H. (1996)
Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cramton, C. (2001) The Mutual Knowledge Problem and Its Consequences for Dispersed Collaboration,
Organisation Science, 12
(3), pp. 346-371.
Davenport, T. and Prusak, L. (1998)
Working Knowledge: How Organisations Manage What They Know. Boston. Harvard Business
Dewey, J. (1934)
Art as Experience. New York: Perigee Books. Grant, R. (1996) Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm.
Strategic Management Journal, Special Issue, Volume 17, pp. 109-
Giunchiglia, F. (1993) Contextual Reasoning.
Epistemologia (Special Issue on Languages and Machines.) 16, pp. 345–364. Guha, R. V. (1991) Contexts: A Formalisation and Some Applications.
Ph.D. diss., Computer Science Department, Stanford
Harvey, F. and Chrisman N. (1998) Boundary Objects and the Social Construction of GIS Technology.
Environment and Planning,
A, 30, pp. 1683-1694.
Held, A., Buchholz, S., and Schill, A. (2002) Modelling of context information for pervasive computing applications. In Proceedings
of SCI 2002/ISAS.
Henricksen, K., Indulska, J., And Rakotonirainy, A. (2003) Generating Context Management Infrastructure from High-Level Context
Models.
In Industrial Track Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Mobile Data Management (MDM2003), (Melbourne/Australia, January), pp. 1–6.
Krauss, R. and Fussell, S. (1990) Mutual knowledge and communicative effectiveness.
In Intellectual Teamwork: Social and
Technological Foundations of Cooperative Work, L. Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1990.
Kuhn, T. (1974) "Second Thoughts on Paradigms", in
The Structure of Scientific Theories edited by F. Suppe, Urbana: University of
Illinois Press, pp. 459-82.
March, J. G. (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organisational learning.
Organisation Science 2 (1), 71–87. McCarthy, J. (1987) Generality in Artificial Intelligence.
Communications of ACM, 30(12), pp.1030-1035. McCarthy, J. (1993) Notes on Formalising Context.
In Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial
Intelligence, Chambery, France. pp. 555-560.
McCarthy, T. (1994)
"Philosophy and critical theory". In McCarthy, T. and Hoy, D.C., Critical Theory. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 5-
Nonaka, I., and Takeuchi, H. (1995)
The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of
Innovation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Otzturk, P. and Aamodt, A. (1997) Towards a model of context for case-based diagnostic problem solving.
In Context-97;
Proceedings of the interdisciplinary conference on modelling and using context (Rio de Janeiro, February), pp. 198–208.
Pasquier, L, (2000) Raisonnements basés sur le contexte: Contextes procéduralisés, graphes contextuels et schèmes d'action
Research
Report LIP6 N.2000-010, University Paris 6, France.
Pepper, S. (2002)
The TAO of Topic Maps [Online], Available: http://www.ontopia.net/topicmaps/materials/tao.html [31 Jan 2007]. Polanyi, M. (1962)
Personal Knowledge. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Polanyi, M. (1966)
The Tacit Dimension, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Politzer, G. and Braine, M. D. (1991)
Responses to inconsistent premises cannot count as suppression of valid inferences. Cognition,
38, pp. 103-108.
Popper, K. (1959)
The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchinson. Shannon, C. and Weaver W. (1949)
The Mathematical Theory of Communications. University of Illinois Press, Urbana , IL. Schendel, D. 1996. Editor's Introduction to the 1996 Winter Special Issue - Knowledge and the firm.
Strategic Management Journal
Schilit, B. Adams, N. and Want, R. (1994) Context-aware computing applications.
In IEEE Workshop on Mobile Computing Systems
and Applications. Santa Cruz, CA, US.
Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management Volume 5 Issue 2 2007 (203 - 214)
Schmidt, A., Beigl, M., and Gellersen, H.-W. (1999) There is more to context than location.
Computers and Graphics,23, 6, pp. 893–
Schutz, A. (1970) In Wagner (Ed.),
On Phenomenology and Social Relations. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Shoham, Y. (1991) Varieties of Context.
In Artificial Intelligence and Mathematical Theory of Computation: Papers in Honor of
John McCarthy, ed. V. Lifschitz, 393–408. San Diego, Calif.: Academic.
Smith, B. (2003) Preprint version of chapter "Ontology", in Luciano Floridi (ed.),
Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Computing
and Information, Oxford: Blackwell, 2003, pp. 155-166.
Spender, J. (1992) 'Limits to learning from the west'.
The International Executive, 34, September/October, pp. 389–410. Star, S. (1989) The structure of ill-structured solutions: Boundary objects and heterogeneous distributed problem solving. M. Huhns,
L. Gasser, eds.
Readings in Distributed Artificial Intelligence. Morgan Kaufman, Menlo Park, CA.
Strang, T., Linnhoff-Popien, C. and Frank. K. (2003) Applications of a Context Ontology Language.
In Proc. of the International
Conference on Software, Telecommunications and Computer Networks (SoftCOM 2003).
Strang, T. and Linnhoff-Popien C. (2004) A Context Modelling Survey. Paper presented at the UbiComp 2004 Workshop - First
International Workshop on Advanced Context Modelling, Reasoning and Management.
Tsoukas, H. and Vladimirou, E. (2001) What is organisational Knowledge?
Journal of Management Studies, 38:7 November. Uschold, M. and Gruninger, M. (1996)
"ONTOLOGIES: Principles, Methods and Applications, Knowledge Engineering Review",
Vol. 11, Nº 2, pp.93-115.
Vasconcelos, J., Kimble, C., Gouveia, F. and Kudenko D. (2000) A Group Memory System for Corporate Knowledge Management:
an Ontological Approach.
Proceedings of the 1
st European Conference on Knowledge Management (ECKM'2000). Bled School of Management, Slovenia, October, ISBN: 0 9510066 4 9, pp. 91-99.
Wenger, E. (1998)
Communities of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Academic Conferences Ltd
Source: http://www.espae.espol.edu.ec/images/documentos/publicaciones/articulos/Comparison_of_Approaches_toward_Formalising_Context.pdf
INVITED CLINICAL COMMENTARY Sexual wellbeing for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: relevance and roles for physiotherapy William MM Levack PhD MHealSc(Rehabilitation) BPthyAssociate Dean Research & Postgraduate Studies; Senior Lecturer in Rehabilitation Rehabilitation Teaching and Research Unit, Department of Medicine, University of Otago Wellington, New Zealand
Perosino G.C., 2012. Scienze della Terra (cap. 2 - modulo V). CREST (To). 2 - ELEMENTI DI PALEOECOLOGIA 2.1 - Definizione di ecologia Il termine ecologia deriva dal greco oikos che significa "casa" o "posto per vivere". L'ecologia è lo studio degli organismi nella loro casa, ma viene anche definita come lo studio delle relazioni fra organismi o gruppi di organismi ed il loro ambiente e tenta di definire l'insieme di innumerevoli fenomeni e relazioni che caratterizzano sistemi molto complessi. Nello stagno, per esempio, avvengono processi di sedimentazione che, nel tempo, portano al suo riempimento. I materiali che si depositano sul fondo hanno caratteri che dipendono da quelli fisici e chimici delle acque e soprattutto dagli apporti di detriti minerali ed organici dagli ambienti circostanti. La presenza di organismi, solitamente rigogliosa, costituisce l'aspetto più rilevante ed arricchisce i sedimenti di sostanza organica. Ma la presenza di quegli organismi, sia come quantità, sia come composizione di specie, dipende dai caratteri fisici e chimici delle acque e questi a loro volta dipendono anche dal clima della regione nella quale si trova quello stagno. Il clima a sua volta influenza la composizione della vegetazione che si trova intorno al bacino, nell'ambito della quale trovano rifugio animali che si nutrono di prede che trovano nell'acqua. È un insieme di relazioni il cui elenco sembra senza fine, ma che, man mano che vengono studiate, consentono di ottenere un quadro generale sempre più attendibile di quell'ambiente.