http://144.214.54.67/group1/_gp1/00000015.htm

I'd use a tree/star/arrow model to organize a simple, yet technically demanding, means to begin determining KM effectiveness.

Tree information structures indicate hierarchical categorization activity. Star information structures indicate associative relational activity. Arrow information structures indicate change recording activity (past change, present change, future/planned change) See /rer/owis/dem/slides/img033.gif.

First quantify the information categorizatin richness WITHIN the enterprise networked (digital data) and non-networked environment (physical libraries, documents, collections, etc.), then its addressability, then its richness of interconnection, then its navigation activity by the users, and then the amount of change tracking that is done on this information.

A part of this is determining how many users have access to the information (tools, connections, proximity, permissions), how many know how to access it (skills, training, management emphasis), and how many know what information is available.

1. Quantify the categorization richness of information within the environment: comprehensive inventory of file system and database system containers, content, and applications, whether stored locally or on a network? See /rer/owis/

2. Determine its addressability: how deeply are documents tagged beyond just the filename, how many fields in all databases are indexed, how many documents on a file system are indexed, how much of the metadata fields for a file or database object are populated, how many enterprise-specific terms or enterprise-variation of common terms are in the enterprise online data dictionary and process repository?

3. Determine its richness of interconnection: How many shortcuts/hyperlinks/XML-links exist between information containers (files, databases, images, video, audio) and between information content destinations (bookmarks, #name HTML tags, XML tags, db queries, etc.), how many enterprise specific topics are contained in "subject trees" built from document and data indeces?

4. Determine navigation activity by the users: what percentage of enterprise users create and execute information interconnections, what percentage uses deep file folder hierarchies, what percentage internally tag their information products and provide metadata on those products, what percentage use structured information tools like databases instead of seminstructured tools for formatted documents and spreadsheets or unstructured tools for unstyled/untagged documents?

5. Determine the amount of change tracking that is done on this information: is version control in place for files and change logs for databases, what percentage of quantified information inventory has change tracking?

Note that these KM questions don't even get into the question of use of knowledge, which is the analytical, decision-thinking, decision making domain of Business Intelligence (Data warehousing, Online Analytical Processing, Decision Support, Executive Information, Context Management, and Situational Awareness)

http://144.214.54.67/group1/_gp1/00000017.htm Note that in the reply preceding my own above reply, the author states that you have to know the goal before you can measure the effectiveness of Knowledge Management.

I disagree, in that information and knowledge must be effectively managed before you can begin to establish and achieve goals.

To illustrate, imagine seeking to achieve a specific goal of with a team, department, corporation, or nation without having a clear awareness of what is known by whom.

When your data, information, knowledge, and awareness is organized for general purposes, then you can apply it effectively and efficiently to achieve specific purposes. Without that maintained organization up front, communication is largely ineffective, very ineffecient, and highly confusing.