pdf 820Kb - INSEAD CALT

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Evaluation level Level 0: Technical performance Level 1: User’s acceptance Level 2: Functionalities Level 3: Transfer Level 4: Impact Level 5: Economic performance Evaluation report of the use of Onto-Logging platform in the user site Structuring role Performance of the ontology authoring tools. Easiness to author an ontology (create new concepts & properties) Features of the ontology editor. Level of adoption of Ontologies. Do the structuring of the knowledge (via ontology) brings a better performance for the organization. What is the effort / benefits to structure the knowledge Deliverable ID: D8b Knowledge processes & Goals Capitalise knowledge Performance of the DUI (publisher mode) and of the MS Word extensions. Ergonomics of entering and annotating new documents in the DUI, and the MS Word extensions. Features & limitation of the DUI-publishing function, and of the MS Word extensions. level of capitalization of knowledge Do the capitalisation of the knowledge assets provide benefit to the organization. What is the cost of capitalizing the knowledge? Retrieve knowledge Performance of the DUI (user mode). General ergonomics of the DUI. Capability to display and manipulate complex information. level of reuse of existing knowledge Is the knowledge use in the organization less reinvented, conducing to a more efficient organization. What is the effort / benefits of searching the knowledge (training, support, etc.). Table 1: Examples of level evaluation according to the knowledge processes Page : 30 of 110 Version: 1.0 Date: 27 january 2004 Status: Final Confid.: Public Share knowledge Scala bility of the multi-ontology mapping. 3.3.3 The different phases of the evaluation As indicated in the first section, the evaluation will fulfil three objectives: • Provide some first feedback to the design process (formative evaluation). Performance of the user profile editor Ergonomics of the user profile editor. Scalability of the multi-ontology mapping. Evolutivity of the User Ontology in the user profile editor level of sharing knowledge amongst people Is the acceleration of the diffusion of knowledge inside the organization translated to tangible benefit for the organization (reactivity, flexibility, etc.)? What is the effort / benefits to put to facilitate the knowledge sharing. (facilitator, incentives, etc.)
Evaluation report of the use of Onto-Logging platform in the user site Deliverable ID: D8b Page : 31 of 110 Version: 1.0 Date: 27 january 2004 Status: Final Confid.: Public • Assess the functionalities of what has been designed (summative). • Assess the substantive value of what has been designed (substantive value). In the first case, formative evaluation will help to readjust the plans and the priority of the Ontologging project, to better understand the users’ needs, and to refine the definition of the different Ontologging components, putting more emphasis on what is considered to be the most important. This phase will first be based on setting-up at the user place an early version of the prototype, and asking them for their feedback. This phase will also consist in evaluating how the different components interoperate with one anot her, and in identifying the functionalities that may be missing, or that would need more attention. In the second case, summative evaluation will help to access what Ontologging has produced, and what are the functionalities available. This phase will consist in the evaluation of the main Ontologging components at the users’ site, and will be achieved with a functioning version of the prototype. In the last cases, the substantive value evaluation will help to understand what are the areas of knowledge management in which the system can contribute the most, and where is the real innovation (incremental or radical) in the Ontologging system. This phase will consist in the analysis of the different components of Ontologging according to a usability perspective (what is really usable for the organization). This phase will be achieved using the result of a consolidated version of the prototype 3.3.4 A pre-selection of the elements to be evaluated Let’s now define, for each of the sub-goals that we want Ontologging to achieve, some elements and criteria to evaluate. 3.3.4.1 Goal 1: Ontologging for helping to structure the work in the organization The structuring role of Ontologging originates from its capability to support the definition of the shared Ontologies that specify the semantic of the different concept and that are used across the whole organization to communicate. Several elements can be taken into account when evaluating the capability of Ontologging to support this structuring role. Technical view The first element is the technical and instrumental, and is related to the capability of the Ontology authoring tools that are provided, to support the definition of the different Ontologies that need to be represented. The evaluation of this element mainly consists in the evaluation of the technical components that are used to author the ontologies (these
Page 1 and 2: The ONTO-LOGGING Consortium consist
Page 3 and 4: Evaluation report of the use of Ont
Page 5 and 6: Executive Summary Evaluation report
Page 29: Evaluation report of the use of Ont
Page 53 and 54: • List of connected users to the
Page 67 and 68: 5.5.1 Description of the evaluation
Page 69 and 70: 6 Discussion and Conclusions Evalua
Page 75 and 76: 8 Annex Evaluation report of the us
Page 81 and 82:
Evaluation report of the use of Ont
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
esolver consultas. C42 Existen axio
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
1 The functionalities provided by D
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
show all

pdf 820Kb - INSEAD CALT

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?