pdf 820Kb - INSEAD CALT

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Evaluation report of the use of Onto-Logging platform in the user site Deliverable ID: D8b Page : 62 of 110 Version: 1.0 Date: 27 january 2004 Status: Final Confid.: Public knowledge retrieval dimension aiming at evaluating the capability of the system to support the more basic knowledge retrieval processes (navigating and searching knowledge); second a more advanced dimension more centred on the users and groups of people in the organization, and the advanced means to support these users and groups (via personalization mechanisms, support for knowledge sharing, etc.). 5.4.1 Evaluating of the basic knowledge retrieval Questionnaire 2 (Ontologging Project Questionnaire) was used to collect the “user” feedback, related to the main usage of the Ontology system. In particular, this questionnaire has helped to collect information related to the use of the central Ontologging tool: the DUI (Distributed User Interface). It has to be reminder that this tool allows the final user to visualize knowledge, to navigate into the knowledge, to search knowledge, and also to add new knowledge items (knowledge capitalization). Some additional feedbacks were collected from the different focus groups and interviews that were organized. Finally, experiments (via scenarios) were used to validate different usages and in particular to identify the difficulties, and to elicitate (cognitive walkthrough) the internal cognitive process followed by the end users. 5.4.1.1 Evaluating the main tool (DUI) The main tool (the DUI) was well perceived and considered as adequate, but some improvement would be well appreciated. Bellow, are some opinions extracted from the questionnaire: The system is all right … “The word enjoy is not correct (but) the DUI is ok and the experience is satisfactory”, “(liked) the flexibility of the tool to navigate the taxonomy, enabling and disabling the desired relationships, choosing which concept to see and which one not”; “(liked) to have a global and comprehensive view of the elements, entities and items involved in the tendering process”, “(liked) the possibility to search information through link in natural language”, “(liked) using the interface for navigation”. … but not perfect. “The way of showing all the information related with one instance is not very useful, is much better viewing everything navigating the ontology”, “Could be more attractive” , “(problem with) Navigation when there is too much documents stored”, “Sometimes it’s difficult to know the best way to perform the searches” , “(disliked) The hierarchical representation of the information. I prefer a more graphical layout.” 5.4.1.2 Usage scenarios More interesting are the usage scenarios of the tools that help to understand how the end user perceived and appropriated the system.
Evaluation report of the use of Onto-Logging platform in the user site Deliverable ID: D8b Page : 63 of 110 Version: 1.0 Date: 27 january 2004 Status: Final Confid.: Public The scenarios bellows represent use cases that the users were asked to elaborate in order to later experiment the system: Tendering scenario 1: Finding ‘experts’ in a specific knowledge area. Approach: Use of a query template called ‘Experts in Knowledge area’. Examples of selections to enter in the query are: OCR, ‘Automatización de procesos (Workflow)’, ‘Gestion de redes’ Tendering scenario 2: Querying all the activity related with a specific customer Approach: Use of a browse template called ‘Customer’ and so you can browse all the operations related with a customer, and all the attributes and relations of these operations. Examples of selections: o AMENA: to see the status of the different operations (activating the two Current Status properties) o Comision Europea (IST): To see involved companies (activating the involves relation) o AENOR: To see that Indra has a strong position in EDM technology in this client (activating refers-to relations) Tendering scenario 3: Viewing the operations categorised by the market. Approach: Use a browsing template (Operations by Market) Examples of selections: o ‘Administración Pública y Sanidad’: many operations o Energía, Operadores y Media: médium number of operations o Espacio: No operations at all Project development scenario 1: Finding the people who worked on a proposal Approach: Just navigating the ontology, going to operations->proposals and selecting some specific as ‘Implantación de un Proyecto Piloto SIG’ (activating has-participant and refers-to) to see that Juan Antonio Alamillos is responsible, and then we can navigate through the Knowledge Area to see other similar projects. Project development scenario 2: Searching documents and contact people related to a third party product. Approach: Just browsing the ontology and going to products, activating (~related with (products)) to see related documentations, and activating ‘manufactured-by’ to get the manufacturer, then the produced-by and then the ‘~works-in’ to see the contact people for this product. Examples of selections: ‘Eyes & Hands FORMS’, ‘BEA Weblogic’
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 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12: Evaluation report of the use of Ont
Page 53 and 54: • List of connected users to the
Page 61: Evaluation report of the use of Ont
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 93 and 94: esolver consultas. C42 Existen axio
Page 103 and 104: 1 The functionalities provided by D
show all

pdf 820Kb - INSEAD CALT

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?