Postbus 69 2600 AB Delft 015-2693793 015-2693799 info@delftcluster.nl www.delftcluster.nl
Delft Cluster verricht lange-termijn fundamenteel strategisch onderzoek op het gebied van duurzame inrichting van deltagebieden.
Theme 7: Knowledge Management
7.4 Document & Content
Management
7.4.1. Review & Strategy
Drs. C.L. Citroen
B. Lander B.Eng, M.LIS
Drs. C.C. van den Berg
Ir. Z.E. Brinkman
7.4. Document & Content Management
7.4.1. Review & Strategy
Keverling Buismanweg 4 Postbus 69 2600 AB Delft 015-2693793 015-2693799 info@delftcluster.nl www.delftcluster.nl
Delft Cluster verricht lange-termijn fundamenteel strategisch onderzoek op het gebied van duurzame inrichting van deltagebieden.
Contactpersoon : Drs. J.J. Halmos
Datum : 6 september 2001
Author(s) : Drs. Ch.L. Citroen
B. Lander B.Eng, M.LIS Drs. C.C. van den Berg Ir. Z.E. Brinkman
Opdrachtgever : Delft Cluster
Project naam : Document & Content Management: Review & Strategy
Project nummer : 07.04.01.01
Aantal pagina's : 39
Tijdens de uitvoering van de werkzaamheden in het kader van Review & Strategy bestond de Delft Cluster-groep van thema 7.4.1.1 uit
Naam Organisatie
Thema Trekker Prof. Dr. R.K. Price IHE
Thema Duwer Prof. Ir. A.M. Mynett WL/Delft Hydraulics Thema Leden Drs. J.J. Halmos (projectleidster) BTUD
Drs. Ch.L. Citroen BTUD
B. Lander B.Eng, M.LIS BTUD Drs. C.C. van den Berg BTUD
Ir. Z.E. Brinkman BTUD
Klankbordgroep Ir. J.J. Olie/Mw. C.J. Oskam GeoDelft Prof. Dr. R.K. Price/S. Velickov IHE
Ir. H.J. Verheij WL
Ir. A.C. van Tol/Ir. P. Spronck TNO Prof. Ir. H.J. Verhagen TU Delft
Betrokken organisatie
Bij de totstandkoming van dit rapport waren betrokken:
Organisatie GeoDelft IHE WL|Delft Hydraulics TNO Bouw TU Delft CiTG
Management samenvatting
Titel Document & Content Management:
Review and Strategy Project Management Drs. J.J. Halmos
Datum September 2001
Project nummer 07.04.01.01
Inhoud
1. Summary
2. Introduction
2.1. Structure of the report 2.2. Review methodology 2.3. Definitions
3. Knowledge Management 3.1. Introduction 3.2. Current situation
3.3. User wishes and expectations 3.4. Recommendations
4. Library services 4.1. Introduction 4.2. Current situation
4.3. User wishes and expectations 4.4. Recommendations
5. Grey documents 5.1. Introduction 5.2. Current Situation
5.3. User wishes and expectations 5.4. Recommendations
6. Next steps
7. Appendix A: Interesting knowledge management projects / developments 8. Appendix B: Analysis of the interviews concerning library services 9. Appendix C: Analysis of the interviews concerning grey literature 10. Appendix D: Interesting projects concerning grey documents 11. Appendix E: BTUD Quick Scan
1. Summary
This project, Review and Strategy (7.4.1.1), is the first of three projects that make up the entire basis project Document and Content Management (7.4.1). The results of this Review and Strategy are intended to act as input to the other projects within 7.4.1. especially the Hybrid Information Centre (7.4.1.2).
The aim of this project is to develop a long-term and a short-term strategy on content and document management for Delft Cluster partners.
The methodology used is an adapted version of BTUD’s Quick Scan. This method is based on interviews with as many different stakeholders of the library (librarians, users, managers) as possible. Individual and group interviews are used. For each type of stakeholder (e.g. librarian), a common set of questions is used across all partner organisations. Questions are open-ended, and therefore the outcome of the interviews is very much qualitative, rather than quantitative. For this Review and Strategy project 60 people were interviewed, some individually, some in group discussions.
The interviews were directed at three distinct areas: knowledge management, document management and library services.
This project focuses on documentary (or explicit) information and as a university library, we have particular expertise in dealing with this kind of information (in both paper and electronic forms).
By analysing the current situation within all DC partner organisations, a short- and long-term strategy has been formulated for further co-operation between the organisations.
Regarding knowledge management, many initiatives were found. Most are quite recent developments and some of them exist only in the form of intentions and ideas. The interest in standardisation of knowledge management differs largely between the Delft Cluster partners. For knowledge management projects in Delft Cluster to be successful, a basic willingness to share knowledge and the conviction that in the long run knowledge management efforts will pay off is needed. There are positive but also negative comments on this issue. Software in the knowledge management sphere is available in all organisations, however the quality and (intended) use of it varies considerably.
It is clear that facilitation of co-operation is needed. It is also important to synchronise some of the essential grey literature creation procedures. Creating tools for virtual knowledge stores and access mechanisms can be helpful too. Ensuring sufficient interaction with other Delft Cluster projects is crucial.
The prototype Hybrid Information Centre that will be developed in the next phase of this basis project will address the points raised here. This Centre will be used as a 'test-bed' for knowledge exchange activities. Co-operation with one or more specific DC Themes is a possibility.
In general, libraries are still seen within Delft Cluster as depositories of printed information rather than as modern knowledge centres. The involvement of Delft Cluster librarians in knowledge management projects is minimal.
Co-operation between the libraries of Delft Cluster partners is limited. Upgrading the currently available library software and services appears to be one of the priorities at this moment. We suggest improving the co-operation between the different Delft Cluster librarians by creating a decentralised co-operation board, the aim of which is to share knowledge and exchange ideas. Librarians will get the opportunity to learn how other libraries work and they can gradually work towards a ‘virtually’ united Delft Cluster Library. Agreements can be made about sharing library collections and catalogues. Consortium licences for journals and databases can also be a topic of discussion for the board.
Similarly, the attitudes and situation regarding grey documents varies greatly between the Delft Cluster partner organisations. The Delft Cluster partners that operate in a competitive market situation show the greatest interest in using grey documents. Researchers tend to show more interest in them than managers do. Reports and lecture notes are found the most critical and useful of grey documents. Sharing of this grey knowledge is a difficult point. There is little, but some, common ground on which to build a system for sharing. However, Delft Cluster
management views the sharing of grey documents as a crucial step in binding Delft Cluster into a knowledge organisation.
In the long term, we propose the building of a ‘DC Greybase’. This DC Greybase contains grey documents in many formats, and is accessible for Delft Cluster partners, and under certain conditions also to the sector and the public. In the coming 2 years we propose to begin with focussing on cultural and procedural components of the whole system, while developing a simple technology component. The content consists of engineering reports, plus teaching materials, theses/dissertations, including multi-media materials.
Some of the results of the KnowME project 1(see Appendix A) are applicable to this report and are mentioned in relevant chapters. One of the results of KnowME that supports our research is that searching for information is an important activity of Delft Cluster engineers - on average they need information 18 times per month, this applies both to internal as well as external sources. Project leaders spend 10-20% of their time searching for information.
2. Introduction
This project, Review and Strategy (7.4.1.1), is the first of three projects, which make up the entire basis project Content and Document Management (7.4.1). The results of the Review and Strategy are intended to act as input to the other projects within 7.4.1. The overall aims of the basis project have been given in earlier documents and are now only briefly restated:
“This basis project addresses the development of facilities for managing the extensive
dependence of researchers and civil engineers on (electronic) documentary information. These include not only text and graphics, but increasingly sound and video, that is, multi-media. Although researchers and engineers are heavily dependent on 'published' documents they are even more dependent on a huge amount of 'unpublished' or 'grey' literature." (Basis Project 7.4.1 Project Proposal)
The review and resulting strategy takes into consideration all types of documentary information sources used by engineers/scientists as well as managers. The documents considered in the review may be formally published information resources or ‘grey literature’. Grey literature may be briefly defined as that which ‘cannot readily be acquired through normal bookselling channels and which is therefore difficult to identify and obtain’2.
The Delft UT Library (BTUD), in co-operation with libraries of the partner organisations, will remain the main gateway to all appropriate published (quality assured, peer reviewed) literature. However, a new system for collecting, storing and accessing grey literature is to be developed in the next part of the Document and Content Management project.
This Review and Strategy report presents the results of a review of the knowledge management activities, library services, and document management systems in each of the five partner organisations of Delft Cluster.
Concerning knowledge management, an analysis is made on current problems, plans and wishes.
An analysis of the present services of the five library/information centres is made and the requirements of users, both scientists/engineers and management, are presented. When assessing library services, it is necessary to comment on the staff that provides these services. However, it is expressly stated here that in this report, they are of a strictly generic nature. Assessment of staff is not within the scope of this review.
Regarding document management, the review explores the current situation (attitudes, systems, plans) as well as the wishes of different types of users.
More importantly, the report presents an analysis of the findings of the review in light of the overall aims of Delft Cluster, and develops a content and document management strategy statement. To accompany this statement a number of concrete action points for the next two years are proposed to help realise this strategy.
2
2.1. Structure of the report
This introduction gives an overview of the methodology used in the Review. Next, some definitions of important terms used throughout the document are given (e.g. ‘document management’, ‘grey documents’, and of course ‘knowledge management’).
Chapter one includes a discussion of the current situation of knowledge management activities and culture within the partner organisations and how this relates to the content and document management project and the knowledge management aims of Delft Cluster.
Chapters two and three of the report look at library services and grey documents. For each area, the following aspects are discussed:
what is the current situation in each of the five different Delft Cluster partner organisations, what are the wishes of users,
what opportunities exist for improvement,
what is our 5 year vision for Delft Cluster, in broad terms what are the concrete plans for the next 2 years.
Finally, a plan of action is outlined for the next phase of the basis project, the building of a ‘hybrid library’. The plan brings together the strategy statement and various action points.
2.2. Review methodology
The methodology used in carrying out the review of partner organisations is an adapted version of the BTUD's ‘Quick Scan’. This methodology, developed by the BTUD, has been used many times before in assessing the library services and management of small to medium sized special libraries.
The methodology is based on interviews with as many different stakeholders of the library (librarians, users, managers) as possible. Individual and group interviews are used. For each type of stakeholder (e.g. librarian), a common set of questions is used across all partner
organisations. But for different stakeholders, different sets of questions are used. Questions are open-ended, not in the style of a questionnaire, and therefore the outcome of the interviews is very much qualitative, rather than quantitative.
The interviews looked at three distinct areas:
the knowledge management activities of Delft Cluster partners – current (non)activities, software systems, existing co-operation between Delft Cluster partners, wishes and future plans document management - practices (systems, procedures) as well as any new initiatives and future plans of individual organisations.
library services – software systems employed, services offered, current initiatives, future plans and management issues.
More information about the Quick Scan methodology is attached as Appendix E, along with the question set used.
As with any data collection, several problems were encountered. In some cases, for a few important stakeholders, interview time was limited (or it was impossible to interview them at all). Much effort was spent in standardising the interview questions, but the nature of a conversation-style interview session means that some areas were discussed in more depth in some interviews, while in others, the focus was elsewhere. The conversation-style interview has
the advantage of allowing interviewees to raise topics that could not be foreseen but are still relevant to the review.
Interviews were held with a total of 60 respondents, 20% were from management, 20% library/archives staff and 60% engineers.
The interviewees where divided over the different DC partner organisations as follows:
Management Engineers Library/Archives
GeoDelft 2 9 3 IHE 3 9 2 TNO-Bouw 1 3 2 TU CiTG 5 2 WL 6 10 4
2.3. Definitions
Document managementThis project has a particular and specific use of the phrase ‘document management’. It is much smaller than the full definition, which includes all issues to do with an organisation’s document production, processing and storing. A document management system usually involves many different types of documents produced and/or used in an organisation, rules for production of documents, version control, routing and tracking processes, archiving, searching and retrieving. Within the scope of this project, ‘document management’ has a more specific focus. In the framework of Delft Cluster, a central system for managing all aspects of a documents life cycle in all organisations is not feasible and not necessarily desirable. Therefore, within the
framework of Delft Cluster, ‘document management’ focuses on the storage (archiving), searching and retrieval of documents - with the aim of making available useful unpublished documents which are produced by one partner organisation to all other partners and, where appropriate, available to the public.
Grey documents
The documents that we include in this document management system are a particular sub-set of all the document types that are produced and used by the partners. They are ‘grey’ documents (i.e. they are not formally published and not available through normal book selling channels), they are useful for at least a period of one year and they are potentially of interest to a wide group of people.
Examples of documents included in this system are:
Project final or interim reports (where client confidentiality allows), report templates Lessons learnt from dealing with a certain project, dealing with a particular type of client, working in a certain country, meeting certain (foreign) regulations etc
Presentations (e.g. PowerPoint), speeches, training materials Multi-media documents such as video tapes
Conference papers (those that are not easily accessible elsewhere)
White papers, internal studies (review of a country’s political situation, a review of a new software product), discussion papers, business environment analyses
Press releases and promotional material from partner organisations Data sets from experimental research, results from literature search
Company policies, manuals and brochures Modelling software
Examples of documents that are not included are:
E-mails (unless the e-mail happens to also fall into one of the categories above) Minutes of meetings
Confidential reports
Quality forms and other standardised forms Specific client management information Regulatory / standards documents News stories
Project management documents (unless they can be used as ‘best practice’ guides) Knowledge management
“A knowledge management system is one whereby the explicit (written down) and implicit (unwritten) knowledge held by the organisation and its employees/members is collected, assessed, stored, made accessible, shared and re-used.” (Nonaka 1987)
Document management is one part of an entire knowledge management system and deals with only the explicit knowledge of the organisation.
Hybrid library
Libraries are about giving access to published information resources (via a catalogue) plus providing accompanying services such as current awareness, literature search, training and reference services.
In recent years, many different terms have been used to reflect the ever-widening types of documents managed and the services offered by a library (e.g. Hybrid library, desktop library, virtual library, digital library, e-library). The ‘virtual’, ‘digital’, ‘hybrid’, ‘desktop’ or ‘e-‘ aspect concerns having some or all of these information resources available in electronic formats at the user desktop rather than in paper format housed in the library building (access versus
ownership). Services may be delivered in a virtual way also (over the telephone, via e-mail or Internet etc).
3. Knowledge Management
3.1. Introduction
Knowledge management has become a somewhat controversial issue with persons engaged in practical activities such as Delft Cluster engineers. Some argue that knowledge management is as old as the world, stone age hunters could not shoot the buffalo all by themselves, but had to rely on sharing of knowledge on the best hunting grounds and methodology. Knowledge management in their eyes is a hype that will fade away in a few years, like most management theories have done.
Others believe that the theoretical background of knowledge management (including research by Nonaka et al. and many others) opened up a whole new area of information usage practices and that proper application of knowledge management will significantly improve the
productivity of knowledge workers in all areas of modern information based society such as Delft Cluster partners.
The definition that Nonaka gave to knowledge management can be summarised as: ‘A knowledge management system is one whereby the explicit (written down) and implicit (unwritten) knowledge held by the organisation and its employees/members is collected, assessed, stored, made accessible, shared and re-used.’
There are many more definitions, but Price 'translated' these in the following definition for Delft Cluster:
'Knowledge management is the strategic and systematic acquisition, application and
dissemination of existing and generated knowledge by Delft Cluster to ensure its productivity, adaptation and competence in the face of increasingly discontinuous environmental change. It centres on organisational and business processes that provide a means of sharing both explicit and tacit knowledge assets within an environment formed out of a synergistic combination of information and communication technologies and the creative and innovative capacities of human beings.
The environment fosters individual and organisational learning.'
The aims of a knowledge management system are generally formulated as a method to speed up innovation, to reduce mistakes, to improve results to clients, to improve efficiency, to preserve knowledge for the organisation when people and particularly 'oude rotten' (experienced staff) leave and to help introduce newcomers to the organisation's philosophy.
Statement of Theme 7 Knowledge Management in the Research programme:
Within Delft Cluster research, making present knowledge available (acquisition) and facilitating the generation of new knowledge are of utmost importance.
In addition, we need to make this knowledge available to end users outside of Delft Cluster (dissemination).
Nonaka’s diagram showing four methods of knowledge transfer is given below. Ideally, an organisation would use all four methods of knowledge transfer:
Socialisation: Tacit to Tacit
Observation, imitation Mentor system Trial & error
Externalisation: Tacit to Explicit Concept visualisation Metaphors, models, analogies Internalisation: Explicit to Tacit Learning by doing Using databases Combination: Explicit to Explicit Library procedures Data mining
One of the findings of the interviews was that several people think of knowledge management predominantly as an enriched Document Management system. In fact, Document management is only one part of the entire knowledge management process, dealing with only the explicit knowledge of the organisation.
In the present research project 'Document & Content Management - Review & Strategy' (07.04.01.01) we inventoried information management as well as knowledge management, along the lines of the Nonaka diagram.
In this study, performed by the BTUD, emphasis was placed on explicit knowledge, matters that have been recorded on paper or, more recently, made available in electronic form. Another area that was investigated, is the contribution that libraries could make to knowledge management in the organisation. This subject is covered in the next chapter.
The questions asked centred on issues such as:
is a knowledge management system operational in the organisation or is such a system planned in the near future
what kind of wishes exist for knowledge management and how could/should it be implemented what software is available that could assist in knowledge management
will sharing of knowledge between Delft Cluster partners offer advantages
3.2. Current situation
During each interview held for the Review, one of the areas of questioning was related to knowledge management in the organisation. This chapter concentrates on that subject. It is interesting to note that replies from within one organisation were not always consistent, sometimes even contradictory.
Knowledge management implementation was underway in GeoDelft, IHE and WL and project leaders had been appointed. In TU-CiTG and TNO-Bouw the need for an internal system was not clear yet. None of the participating institutes had a fully operational knowledge management system in place.
The results of the interviews can be categorised in 5 topics: present activities, perceived problems, software, library involvement (see next chapter), Delft Cluster co-operation. The wishes and theories will be treated in the next paragraph.
Present activities
Institutes have started several kinds of knowledge sharing activities. These activities can be defined on 3 levels: within the Institute, among Delft Cluster partners and with the sector (the outside world). In a few cases, a formal project leader has been appointed for the knowledge management or knowledge development projects.
Examples of present knowledge management activities are Intranets and Extranets,
Communities of Practice, discipline groups discussing common interests, a pilot of a Virtual Knowledge Centre, knowledge maps (with CV's including areas of expertise and knowledge/-relationships that employees have with government) and databases with client information or a customer relations database.
In order to exploit tacit knowledge, activities are initiated such as ‘coaching discussions' where more experienced staff 'empty their head' for younger colleagues. Another method currently used is to hold workshops discussing recent projects to see what knowledge can be passed on from senior to junior staff. Yet another method is a knowledge-based system that consists of a structured question handling system to record implicit knowledge of employees.
Another good example of a knowledge management activity is where the WL management has decided to apply a standard on how to run a project. Knowledge management ideas are
implemented in this system: At the intake phase the project leader has to decide if a project is interesting enough from a knowledge management point of view. If yes, then it is recorded. In the report phase and at the closure of a project, tasks are added to the project description so that experience is preserved and information is easily extractable.
An example of use of explicit knowledge is the compilation of lists of all internal and external WL reports and conference papers, containing project-number, title, client, department, confidentiality level and duration. These lists can be published on the Intranet/Internet. Perceived problems
In some organisations knowledge management has not yet become an issue because there is no interest or because of doubts as to the benefits of sharing one's own knowledge. At the same time though, there are complaints about lack of interaction by other respondents in the organisation.
Examples of 'crying in the desert' are:
At IHE a 'Lack of a policy for access to lecture notes and MSc. and PhD theses' was mentioned. At the University, comments were that 'no tools exist for sharing each other's documents', 'there is no Intranet' and 'the only 'electronic' information about members’ publications available is a list of references put on someone's personal web page', this is an 'environment where little has been organised, formal channels are used randomly and the main link, for input as well as output, is informal networks'.
One result of these problems is that communication via e-mail between the members of e.g. Delft Cluster Theme 5 is poor and documents do not always arrive at their destination.
A reason for lack of sharing is the opinion that research results should be kept on a shared drive only when the research is completed and validated. Otherwise, it can mislead other users of the shared domain.
Software
Comments were recorded on the application of software for knowledge management.
In general, information procedures will change rapidly with the advent of new software such as Groupware, automation of archives, interlinking of institute document servers. Recent versions of library (administration) software are fully internet/network capable and can provide a solution for making grey literature and the library catalogue available for searching from desktops.
Livelink, as an example, will help in solving certain knowledge management bottle necks; it is project orientated, can organise access to summaries or the full text of relevant documents, is part of an Intranet and includes workflow modules, project profiles, knowledge areas, project histories etc. It can also be configured as an Extranet for regular customers.
Another example is BSCW (Basic Support for Cooperative Work) - a platform for the exchange of knowledge, providing better access to project documents.
A valid comment is that this kind of software that must be used intensively and can therefore introduce a new potential source of RSI.
From the KnowME study, it became clear that the co-ordination of ICT products within Delft Cluster is minimal. Without proper co-ordination, it is not easy to benefit from each other. Delft Cluster co-operation
For knowledge management projects in DC to be successful, a basic willingness to share knowledge and the conviction that in the long run knowledge management efforts will pay off, is needed. There are positive but also some negative comments on this issue:
Positive:
Setting up of a knowledge base or map, enabling knowledge sharing, both internal to each organisation or within DC, is considered useful, but only if it is firmly supported by top management.
The sharing of reports in DC could be useful but where confidentiality is an issue, only on the level of title and abstract; final reports of research should be made available. Results of public research can be made accessible freely. Only a few are completely confidential.
It can improve DC strengths to have DC digital archives, but only if DC has a clear view of its own mission and context.
An example of a joint database would be a system for relation management with client and country information of all DC partners. E.g. credit standing of clients would be useful
information. Currently, it is possible for colleagues from different departments within the same institute to serve the same clients without knowing it.
Some of the more cautious comments are:
The possible co-operation in the provision of information/knowledge between the five Delft Cluster partners is not always considered an advantage. The aspects of competition (acquisition of projects) will play a role too. Results of projects performed for external clients usually remain confidential.
If knowledge sharing is to be a success, Delft Cluster partners must dispose of additional information to what is already available internally.
3.3. User wishes and expectations
The following is a sample list of comments regarding the knowledge management wishes of interviewees:
Knowledge management, according to a TNO-Bouw expert, starts with recording and making accessible of simple matters such as terminology/definitions, protocols, formulae, check lists, even if they are stringently restricted to one domain. Examples in the GWW sector are the 'Baggerthesaurus', the 'Handboek snijden klei' etc. What may be achieved by a knowledge management effort, is to make standard use of one data model, such as Dublin Core compatible metadata.
The opinion was expressed that attempting to get all DC partners to agree on one knowledge management, Groupware, library or document management software and procedure, e.g. harmonisation, would not be achieved in the short term, because of existing organisational differences between the partners.
In organisations that do not have a knowledge management system in place, but also in others, it is important to ensure a well-filled store of documents and an effective, sophisticated retrieval system. The system should be based on subject indexing of existing explicit knowledge (e.g. a search facility on the internet/intranet sites). This database could also contain methodologies regularly in use.
Knowledge mapping (a guide to find an expert or consultant in a particular field, e.g. in DC) is a good idea to start a knowledge-sharing program; essential is feed back to this expert. The person who fills in this map should be made responsible for a correct description of the field with standardised terminology. Knowledge mapping is the focus of another Theme 7 project – Corporate Knowledge Platform.
On a personal level, a system that can assist in ordering personal papers properly would be needed in order to share experiences. Not everything has to be available locally; to know what is available elsewhere is an important asset. Nevertheless, there will probably always remain a need for a 'human factor', an intermediary who can be called to help when the necessary information is difficult to retrieve. The literature search service and the copy delivery service will remain useful, certainly in the near future.
Whatever system is implemented, it should be properly adapted to the needs of a less trained user and proper instruction should be provided at all times.
3.4. Recommendations
According to results of the review, the aims of this project, and our expertise in documentary information as a university library, the following recommendations are made:
In order to make any kind of knowledge management feasible and successful, facilitation of co-operation will be needed. However, sharing explicit knowledge is always easier than sharing tacit/implicit knowledge. In subsequent chapters of this report, recommendations are made for increasing awareness of knowledge management and increasing interaction between partners in sharing grey documents and in library services and collections.
In order to create some order out of the currently widely differing document systems, it will be useful to try to synchronise essential grey literature creation procedures.
The next activity in Theme 7.4.1 projects will be to select and implement tools for virtual knowledge stores and access mechanisms.
The prototype Hybrid Information Centre, the second phase in this BTUD basis project, will give the possibility to test methodologies that are available on the market now and that will be adapted to specific Delft Cluster requirements. In the short term, these are likely to be
Ensuring sufficient interaction with the other Theme 7 projects is essential; this refers to the Communities of Practice (tacit knowledge), Learning Organisations (sharing culture), KnowME (assessing the current knowledge management situation of each organisation) and integration with the Corporate Knowledge Platform in the long term. Content will have to be linked to specific Theme groups.
4. Library services
4.1. Introduction
All five Delft Cluster partner organisations have their own library. The libraries provide the organisations with the necessary information to support their own research and education. Besides being a depository ofowned printed and electronicinformation, a library is nowadays an important intermediary in finding information elsewhere in the world and in delivering this information in an efficient way to the local user. In order to find out whether the DC libraries actually fulfil their users' wishes and expectations, we performed the so-called Quick Scan, a methodology based on interviews. The Quick Scan is meant to obtain an insight in the current library situation seen from several different perspectives.
We tried to find out what wishes the library users had for improving the library services in their own organisation and what the users thought of the co-operation between the DC libraries. We were interested in the ideas and wishes of all the DC institutes' management, the librarians, archivists and library users. As far as possible, we talked to people representing all of the mentioned groups.
4.2. Current situation
This review of the current situation within the Delft Cluster libraries is based on an analysis of the results from the Quick Scan interviews. A detailed analysis of the libraries is included in Appendix B: Analysis of the interviews concerning library services. Below is a brief overview of some important findings.
Target groups
All five Delft Cluster organisations are involved in research within the field of civil engineering. Three of the institutes carry out research projects for the market outside the DC. These three organisations are not involved in education ofstudents. The other two are educational institutions; they are also involved in research All five institutes employ scientists and
researchers who are the important common target user group for all five Delft Cluster libraries. The researchers are quite regular library visitors: most of them also usually build up their own collection of books and documents. This group is well trained in using the freely accessible Internet resources where scientific information can be found independently of library resources. Researchers often arrange their own subscriptions to journals.
In one organisation, it became clear that researchers were barely aware of electronic journals, databases and library services; their only contacts were informal networks, which sometimes were quite extensive, including international contacts.
The regular and the PhD students are the most frequent library users. In some cases, a library-training program is included in their study curriculum. Students seem to be quite experienced in performing searches, in accessing information sources and in finding what they are looking for. This group of library users is quite satisfied with the level of service offered by their libraries. Project team leaders and managers do not seem very interested in visiting libraries. When it comes to priorities, they would rather outsource their literature search to a skilled person like a local librarian.
Library staff
The DC partners employ, on average, two full timeequivalent stafffor their library. The CiTG (Civil Engineering) faculty employs three additional persons for the evening hours.
The DC library staff is educated in the traditional library skills based on performing the traditional library tasks while the modern document management world changes rapidly. In general, DC librarians are not well trained in modern library skills and are not kept up-to-date with the newest developments. Another problem is that the libraries are hardly involved in any of the Delft Cluster knowledge management projects in which libraries, as depositories of explicit knowledge, could play an important role.
Budget
The average DC library budget for updating of the collection and for the ICT purposes varies from kf 50 to kf 125. In two cases the library users place their book orders through the library but they cover the costs of the items they order for themselves.
Library committees oftenhave a role in dividing the budget in a balanced way among the scientific sections of the faculty and to co-ordinate the collection build up.
Collection
In most of the Delft Cluster organisations, there is some agreement about using another DC library collection besides their own. All DC libraries also make use of BTUD / TU faculty libraries. Most collections of DC libraries include books, internal reports and conference proceedings. IHE and CiTG also store their own lecture notes and theses.
Access to electronic online literature resources
All the DC libraries have access to online electronic resources and CD-ROM's of their own choice. Yet not everyone is entirely satisfied with the databases used by the organisation. For instance, there are negative opinions about Fluidex.
One the libraries has direct access to specialised databases via the BTUD campus licences.In the overview table (see appendix), the electronic online resources are listed per DC partner organisation.
Journals
All DC libraries have subscriptions to printed journals, but there are only a few cases where journals are circulated among interested persons and a current awareness system is in use. In one case, a table of contents of important new issues is sent to readers. In many cases the journals are sent immediately to the relevant departments and are not returned to the library. Other journals are put on reading shelves in or near the library. The Internet offers access to a significant number of full text journals free of charge. These are available on all the desktops. Most full text electronic journals however are only available at an extra cost to subscribers of the printed issues. On the university campus, about 1200 electronic journals can now be accessed, most of them by a link to the publisher's web site. The CiTG faculty has access to all the campus facilities of BTUD but has also a journal collection of its own.
GeoDelft library creates and publishes it's own abstracts of new relevant articles books, report series etc. These records form the library catalogue.
The journal budget is sometimes centralised but may be decentralised to the
departments/business units. Most libraries have outsourced the administration of journal subscriptions.
The WL also makes use of the CiTG journal collection; the IHE students consult several of the other institute's libraries. CiTG students may also use the GeoDelft library collection.
Catalogue
Each of the Delft Cluster libraries has a different catalogue system from a different software supplier. The catalogues are of quite different quality, functionality and price. Fortunately, in the near future two or three of the DC libraries intend to use the Aleph system, which will mean some degree of standardisation within DC. The largest of the DC library catalogues, that of the BTUD, is an Aleph system. Two of the catalogues are already outdated (a DOS version) and urgently need replacing. All the catalogues are accessible from desktops either via Intranet or via the local network (IHE).
Document delivery
Most of the Delft Cluster libraries make use of an external document delivery service. In most cases the BTUD has been assigned as the primary document supplier, although not everyone is entirely satisfied with the service.
Co-operation between DC partners
A certain level of co-operation in the information area already exists between (couples of) DC partners, such as: GeoDelft - WL, TNO Bouw - CiTG, IHE - BTUD and WL - CiTG - BTUD. From the KnowME measurements, it is clear that the BTUD Library 3 is used by a large number of respondents. 60% use it regularly, 26% intermittently. The GeoDelft Library is used by 37% of respondents. Services obtained from both libraries are: borrowing of publications, requesting copies of articles (especially from the BTUD), having literature searches performed. In total, over 20 other libraries are also used. Those people that have a habit of using a library, often use more than one.
Intranet / alerting library service
All the DC partners except the CiTG faculty have an Intranet. In most cases the libraries maintain their own website on the Intranet or (in one case) Internet.
The Intranets maintain links to interesting web information resources like: Best of the Web (WL), Current Contents (WL, IHE until recently)
The library-webpages provide information on free electronic magazines, available databases, new books at the library, and a list of periodicals.
The CiTG faculty also publishes information about new library acquisitions in a faculty's a weekly newsletter (electronic and on paper).
Findings
In general, libraries are still seen within Delft Cluster as depositories of printed information rather than as modern information / knowledge centres.
The DC library personnel are not well trained in modern library skills and knowledge management. The DC librarians express a feeling of being isolated within their own
organisations and also within the whole DC environment. They are not much involved in the developments taking place in the information world. In addition, a sense of the overall importance of communication and pro-activity towards the client population is definitely lacking in the DC libraries.
Each of the five DC libraries has a different style of operating: they are of different sizes, they are differently organised and they are managed by different internal policies. Each library is a world apart not having much impact on the rest of the DC environment. Having similar target groups the libraries offer their clients / users traditional services varying from modest to quite extensive. The co-operation between the libraries seems to be very limited and in the best cases only bilateral. There is hardly any awareness of possible extensions of the library services. Upgrading the currently available library software and services seems to be the priority at this point.
Another important issue is knowledge management. The library is a place where (explicit) knowledge is concentrated in a form of printed / electronic documents or as human (librarian) expertise. Libraries need to operate on the leading edge of knowledge management projects and play a key role in knowledge management developments. The library staff is not involved in the key knowledge management strategy plans. Moreover, from our review, it is clear that most knowledge management projects within Delft Cluster do not involve libraries. The library personnel feel overlooked where it comes to training and to building up expertise in developments of knowledge management.
4.3. User wishes and expectations
The Civil Engineering faculty library is the only DC library that has full and unlimited access to all resources and services offered by the campus facilities of the BTUD. There certainly is a wish for improving this situation. Most of the library users would like better access to online information resources. This could be done by sharing database licences and journal
subscriptions and most libraries are eager to pursue this. For example, CiTG is interested in purchasing the 'Digital Topographic Map of The Netherlands' but because of budget limits is interested in sharing the costs and the use of this software item with others.
One of the managers proposed the purchase, exploitation and maintenance of common on-line information resources by all the DC organisations in the future.
Access to modern BTUD campus facilities seems to be an interesting idea for all the DC partners.
Librarians and end users are all interested in having better library software, for instance a catalogue that can be accessed not only from the desktop but also from outside the organisation (via Intranet or Internet).
All librarians are interested in a wider co-operation with the other DC libraries. Sometimes they mean just bilateral co-operation (IHE - WL). The only real problem we encountered were concerns in sharing internal reports that are usually stored in the DC libraries. Internal policies of some DC organisations apply strict confidentiality rules on accessing these reports.
4.4. Recommendations
Many end users have a misunderstanding that relevant and up-to-date information can simply be found through the Internet search engines. Most of the relevant information can only be
accessed using specialised sources. Searching these specialised (not freely accessible) databases involves having proper access rights and paying costs for the use of the database. Having the search performed by an authorised information professional means getting better, up-to-date, complete and cheaper information. No matter how skilled and independent the end users seem to be, the library must always be able to provide a skilled person who can perform a
A two year plan
A common library policy
In our opinion, oneeffective way to create a broader co-operation platform between the DC partner organisations is to start with the libraries. Without making any major organisational changes or investments, a process of adjustments can be started straight away by setting up a common libraries co-operation board. The main task of such a board will be to trigger a culture shift within the DC organisations.
In order to prepare the ground for the co-operation we need to convince the DC organisations that sharing yields real results. To show them that sharing begins by identifying areas of common interest. We propose creating a decentralised co-operation board with the aim of sharing knowledge and exchanging ideas. Within this platform, libraries can learn from each other while maintaining their independence. They will get the opportunity to adjust their policies and they can gradually work towards a virtually united Delft Cluster Library where, for example, agreements are made about sharing of the library collections.
The new board, called DC Libraries Interest Group, needs to operate within the communities of Practice principles (Lessons Learned, Best Practices,) by meeting regularly, giving each other advice and exploring options for sharing. In the quickly changing modern library world and with new developments continuously coming up (e.g. new library software, knowledge management) there is a need for ongoing education of library staff. The DC Libraries Interest Group could co-ordinate professional library training for all the DC libraries, organise periodic job rotation and focus attention on client satisfaction with library and information services. Common training and educational sessions should be organised and expertise can be shared. Such a DC Libraries Interest Group can be established within the next 6 months. The idea is to exchange knowledge without centralising any of the DC library services.
Consortium licences for journals and databases.
None of the DC libraries, except the Civil Engineering Faculty researchers and students on campus, have proper access to the wide world of specialised licensed databases and subscription electronic journals. The variation in access depends not only on the individual organisation’s internal policy and local needs but also on the available budget. Most of these products are only available at significant cost. From the interviews it is clear that many engineers see access to these sources as an urgent need and an issue to be resolved as soon as possible. Depending on the wants and wishes expressed by DC Libraries Interest Group the BTUD could be a mediator in discussions with publishers and indexing and abstracts services to obtain consortium licences for journals and databases for the Delft Cluster group. These discussions are generally quite complex as publishers reckon on increased revenues from increased user populations. The BTUD has established relationships with many important publishers and database producers in scientific and engineering fields and has previously had successful discussions regarding shared licences. DC libraries can only benefit from this.
One of the advantages of being a Delft Cluster member could be the sharing of the licence costs. Although not all users clearly see the benefits of access via their own PC, establishing such a common service throughout the DC can provide a more direct and cheaper way of information retrieval for every DC researcher or student.
In the civil engineering world several general engineering and some specialised databases are widely used. Below is a short list of the most important sources:
Compendex (predominantly US sources, includes all core civil engineering subjects) ISI Current Contents (journal contents alerting publication)
ICONDA (International Construction Database)
Applied Science and Technology Index (general sciences)
As a first step to enable access for Delft Cluster partners to these online information sources, the BTUD could initiate negotiations with the copyright owners or intermediaries in order to see what kind of contracts and costs are involved. In a second step, we would ask the DC Board to consider subsidising the extra costs of these important new facilities.
A similar list could be constructed and a similar procedure could be started for some of the most relevant journals that are available in electronic form. This would require input from each institute as access to these journals is in most cases only available combined with a print subscription.
A long-term vision: sharing library resources
Once a basis for co-operation has been created and the DC Libraries Interest Group is
established here will be room for establishing the added value of access to a broader knowledge base.
Sharing collections
The logical first next step would be to enable searching through each other's collections. To do this simply, we propose building a common platform (e.g. a website) with links to all the DC local catalogues. This facilitates 'looking into each other collections' without having to leave your own desk and will help build a culture of sharing.
Knowing what material can be found in the other DC libraries is one thing. Having access to it is another one. Clear rules need to be set agreed concerning access to each other's collections. The website (mentioned above) could also provide a request form for ordering a book from one of the DC libraries and for having it sent to a client elsewhere in DC.
Searching all separate catalogues
The next step we propose is to provide one common search tool for all the catalogues. This step requires considerable preparation work to be done first such as defining common avenues of access and search. The catalogues need to be brought sufficiently in line with each other so that a basic common search routine is possible.
We need to find out what software for such a search is available on the market and what software fits our requirements best.
An agreement between the DC partners must be made on access rights and on security requirements.
One common catalogue
Finally in the long term there is an option of creating one common catalogue for all the DC libraries.
To start with, we need to evaluate the workability of available systems and the modes of operation.
Having a common catalogue we speak for the first time of a real DC virtual (hybrid?) library, situated in separate physical locations but transparent to the end user. Any DC library user can have one simple method of accessing all resources without knowing the location from which the publication is being delivered. The document would then be supplied through one unified delivery service system.
5. Grey documents
5.1. Introduction
A system for sharing the grey literature produced by DC partner organisations clearly advances the DC knowledge sharing aims as outlined in the chapter on knowledge management. Being able to contribute, search and access grey documents from their own organisation or from other DC partners will benefit DC researchers in many ways:
more information can be used in their own work – often grey literature is very hard to locate and is therefore easily ignored even when it could be useful;
more opportunities to learn from the work of others – learn how to do things (sharing best practice) or learn how not to do things (lessons learned);
more opportunities for re-using material – less re-inventing of the wheel means more efficiency and more consistency.
All these benefits contribute to speeding up work processes without increasing errors and making outputs and deliverables better quality.
During the review process, there was a mixed response to the questions about sharing grey documents. Partner organisations had very different attitudes (and corresponding
systems/processes) towards grey documents. There is little (but some) common ground on which to build a system for sharing. However, sharing grey documents is viewed as a crucial step in binding DC into a knowledge organisation.
Grey literature may be briefly defined as that which ‘cannot readily be acquired through normal bookselling channels and which is therefore difficult to identify and obtain’4. An extended definition of a ‘grey literature’ and ‘document management’ can be found in the introduction of this report.
5.2. Current Situation
A picture of the current attitude and situation regarding grey documents in each of the partner organisations was built up during interviews with various people involved with these documents at each organisation. The attitudes and situation varied widely between organisations. Below is a summary of the findings of the review.
The variation of attitudes towards grey documents between organisations may be related to: the type of end user and producer – e.g. students do not consider that the grey material that they produce is of interest to others;
money/time available for overhead in different organisations – e.g. 85% of declarable hours at TNO Bouw does not encourage staff to think about contributing the grey documents that they produce,
the subject(s) that are covered,
the culture in the organisation and the awareness at management level that knowledge management is of importance to survive in the market.
It is interesting to note that IHE and CiTG, both education institutes that do not operate on the market, have only a minor interest in their grey documents.
Most organisations used and produced client reports (client deliverables), internal reports, in-house training materials, conference papers, other speeches, project records, client information, modelling software and similar. IHE and TUD Civil Engineering faculty (CiTG) in particular use and produce lecture notes and theses. For all organisations, reports were identified as the most critical and useful of grey documents. CiTG mentioned the need for information on technical expertise of construction and engineering firms.
Among management level staff, there is a common perception that sharing and using grey documents is not very important. This is because of the type of work they do and the way they work. However, among research staff, there was agreement that sharing and using grey
literature would be useful. Research staff are often younger and cannot rely quite so much on a personal network of contacts and colleagues.
KnowME research results (See Appendix A) show that access to 'official' reports of DC and deliverables from theme research varies across DC themes from reasonable to poor; but that other DC documents are even less available.
Another result of the KnowME research shows that over 80% of respondents are willing to make planning documents, research results, presentations etc. available to colleagues. However, only about 20% have actually done so.
Storage of physical and digital reports.
Across all organisations, methods of collecting, storing and accessing documents varied widely from ‘very little happening’ (CiTG) to ‘some systems working’ (TNO Bouw) to more
successful and systematic procedures (WL). The other organisations (IHE and GeoDelft) were in between these examples.
CiTG pays little attention to collecting and storing reports, conference papers etc. produced in house. There is no systematic collection of grey documents. The BTUD catalogue only includes descriptions of CiTG-report series; the catalogue does not contain descriptions of individual reports. Individual staff members often put references of their own work up on their own web sites. However, few full texts are available mainly because of copyright restrictions.
Similarly, there is little in the way of systems for grey documents at GeoDelft. Many conference papers and presentations are only stored in individual files (paper or electronic) and there are no established procedures for collecting this material. Paper reports are stored at different locations of the archive. There is an index of the reports since 1996.
TNO Bouw reported that procedures for getting reports and presentations in paper format into the library worked well, however, collecting and storing digital material was less systematic. Summaries of some reports are available on the TNO Intranet. Many conference papers remain in individual offices. Once in the library, grey documents are accessible via the catalogue. The system for storing and accessing lecture notes is a feature of IHE’s grey documents. There is a system in place for storing paper and digital copies of lecture notes and these are accessible by certain staff members at their desktop. Paper copies of theses are given to the library for proper storage and retrieval. The library catalogue is available at staff desktops.
WL has a system in place for storing digital reports and ‘all’ reports are available in the library. Project-related grey documents are regulated by ISO procedures and are therefore better managed than other grey documents for which access is more limited. A recent management decision allows public reports and published papers to be placed on the WL Internet site for free public access to the full text.
5.3. User wishes and expectations
All interviewees acknowledged that they could use grey documents and that if they were available in electronic formats, at their desktop, more use could be made of existing resources. Excellent retrieval tools are also necessary to give answers to different types of questions. More research is required to find out about the different information needs and specific questions answered by DC researchers. This work was proposed as a project in Theme 5 of Delft Cluster research program.
These outcomes correspond with findings of the DC KnowME report. This research says that if grey documents are made better accessible, ‘quick wins’ can be made.
From the review, it was obvious that the grey documents of most interest are reports (TNO Bouw, WL, GeoDelft) and lecture notes (IHE). Other grey documents, such as conference papers, speeches, internal publications etc are considered to be of less importance.
The wishes and expectations of users regarding sharing grey documents with other DC partners is a difficult point. Everyone can see value in knowing what the others do, but everyone sees difficulties in sharing their own documents. However, there is a desire to share where there is no overlap and where competition allows. Another complicating factor is confidentiality of some of the material. Client information and client reports can not be shared without the permission of the client. In addition, unavailability of specific software tools, due to management decisions, play a role. The main problem seems to come from the internal policies of the DC organisations. Staff are not rewarded for sharing their knowledge with colleagues inside or outside their organisation in contrast to how some organisations in the commercial world act. There are no procedures for capturing implicit or tacit knowledge. Very often, there is hardly any time left for other-than-project activities.
Reports are currently accessible via the library catalogue at TNO Bouw, WL and IHE (theses). None of the organisations makes them electronically available for their staff. WL has plans in this direction. Software plans go in the direction of Livelink (GeoDelft). TNO Bouw and WL are both searching for a solution for the electronic storage and retrieval of their internal reports. IHE is looking for a software solution for their lecture notes.
5.4. Recommendations
Long term vision
This section outlines a 5-year vision for the management of grey documents in DC. With the results of the survey, in combination with the knowledge sharing aims of DC, we propose the creation of ‘DC Greybase’. The entire system is made up equallyof technological, procedural and cultural components.
The final envisagedDC Greybase contains many different types of grey documents including sound and image files, data sets, modelling software and other material. In principle, the collection is accessible to the public, DC sector organisations and of course to DC partners. Because we can foresee that the documents will have different levels of confidentiality, access to individual documents is well organised by automated and procedural access control. The contributors to the DC Greybase must be confident that protected documents are only seen by those who have permission. Documents are contributed by all partner organisations.
Greybase will assist in overcoming the barrier that came up from the KnowME study: the willingness to share documents, but the actual lack of concrete results of sharingwithout a proper mechanism.
There is a single user-friendly search interface and each part of each document (e.g. summaries, references and full texts) is searchable.
Submission (and editing/withdrawal) procedures are as automated as possible and the amount of extra work required of DC staff is a minimum. These procedures are flexible and are determined at each DC organisation.
Two-year plan
The preceding long term vision, in combination with the priorities of end users and DC knowledge sharing aims, has been brought back to a practical plan for the coming two years. We propose to begin with focussing on cultural and procedural components of the whole system, while developing a simple technology component. This is considered prudent as no amount of technology alone can make the system a success. In two years time, a simple, integrated database of engineering reports, plus teaching materials and these/dissertations will be established. To start with, only DC organisations are able to search and retrieve documents from the DC Greybase. When DC users are confident with the system, especially with the security aspects, the DC Greybase can be opened for the sector and the public. The procedures for submitting documents are simple and as flexible as practical. The aims of the system and the value of sharing documents are well understood by all. Lots of effort will be put in trying out possibilities to get people contributing and sharing information to the DC Greybase. The sharing also raises political questions in the different organisations. It is therefore important to search for co-operation at appropriate management levels of the participating institutes.
The architecture of the DC Greybase has the following components:
Procedures: DC partner organisations will be able to develop (and change) their procedures to collect their electronic reports, and to store them in the DC Greybase. A certain level of consistency is required and will be maintained by periodic checks of random documents by a retrieval specialist. In addition, procedures for deletion, modification and viewing the database are needed. We hope they can be as simple as possible, and can fit into the procedures and workflow already existing in different partner organisations. Automated procedures are needed to give or refuse (groups of) users entrance to (groups of) documents/descriptions etc.
Concept for storage and retrieval: if we want tailor-made results of the search queries, we have to make use of modern retrieval tools. The results of the KnowME study give some insight into the ways engineers form queries and a lot of external research exists on this topic. As a result of this research, decisions can be taken about whether to store the whole document full text, or just some parts of the document, or whether documents will be rewritten into a standard format. It depends on the questions that different user groups ask: what level of information do they need, do they need knowledge or data; do they want names, or summaries, or results, or used
standards or metadata?
Software: software is needed for storage and retrieval of the documents. There are two fundamental types of software that can be of use: Information storage and retrieval software (IRS) or Document management software (DM). In recent years, these two types of software are actually converging in terms of their functionality. IRS is known for large databases and good retrieval tools. The BTUD has experience with Verity, BRS and Fulcrum. DM's main qualities are the management of files, formats, security, version management etc. The BTUD has experience with DocsOpen, BSCW, Livelink, and Lotus Notes. Some DM's have the option of choosing an internal DBMS. This can sometimes be an IRS.
The Greybase and the Hybrid information Centre
The Hybrid Information Centre aims to provide access to both published and grey literature and therefore the Greybase will be an integral part of the Hybrid Information Centre. However, before deciding if and how a Greybase will be built, it has to be clear who will be responsible for the (future)development and ongoing maintenance of the software, the retrieval tools and the content. In addition, the question of participation of DC partners in terms of content is important. Are the DC partners prepared to change some of their procedures to get the content into the Greybase?
6. Next steps
By analysing the current situation in library services and document management within all the DC partners, a strategy has been formulated for further co-operation between the organisations. The complete short- and long-term strategy has been described in the previous chapters. Below is a summary of the short-term strategy that can be realised within the next two years. Knowledge Management
Build a prototype Hybrid Information Centre, which will be used to test knowledge management methodologies applicable to specific DC requirements
Initiate interaction with other DC projects during he development of the Hybrid Information Centre and ensure that content will be linked to specific Theme groups.
Library services
Establish a decentralised co-operation board called DC Libraries Interest Group with the aim of sharing knowledge and exploring areas of common interest. This step is mainly meant to trigger a culture shift in the DC libraries and to convince the DC organisations that sharing yields real results.
Explore possibilities for sharing licences of e-journals and databases, where the BTUD can be a mediator in between Delft Cluster and publishers in obtaining consortium licenses.
Investigate possibilities for collection sharing and one common search tool for all the DC catalogues.
Grey documents
Find ways to encourage the sharing of grey documents between DC researchers; this sharing should become a routine for all the people.
Establish a simple, integrated database (The Greybase) for managing all DC grey documents in such a way that all DC partner organisations can store, search for and retrieve their grey documents. Establishing such a system includes setting up the procedures, concepts for storage and retrieval and selecting/developing the appropriate software tools.
The above-described short-term strategy will form the basic input for the future Hybrid Information Centre, to be designed in project 7.4.1.2.
7. Appendix A: Interesting knowledge management projects /
developments
Delft University of Technology
The BTUD is in the process of developing a set Knowledge Centres, called 'BTUD Virtueel Kenniscentra', with input from its own subject experts and researchers in the specified subject area. Two of these centres will become operational prototypes by September 2001. In the longer term, a network of 15-20 knowledge centres is planned, covering all educational disciplines of the TU Delft. Following is an excerpt of the philosophy for these centres.
“Knowledge Centre Mission Statement”
The knowledge centre exists to provide user focused integrated access to all library information resources and to facilitate sharing of the knowledge contained within the user group.
Specifically the knowledge centre will:
Provide access to library information resources in a structured and clear manner
Establish and support a community of interest around the subject area to facilitate knowledge sharing between users
Promote and raise the level of information literacy skills of library users “ KnowME
KnowME means Knowledge Management Measurement Evaluation.
KnowME measures qualities of knowledge management and is a learning and action instrument to enhance the effectiveness of the use of available and developed knowledge in Delft Cluster. KnowME looks inside and from the inside to the outside.
The measurement instrument, a questionnaire, has been developed through a series of
workshops. It is based on an existing method, but has been adapted to the specific situation of Delft Cluster.
With the help of 49 project leaders from the 7 research-themes, information has been gathered on 9 main knowledge management topics (13 subjects). The basic results are described in a report.
Based on the results of the first KnowME study, agreements will be reached on actions for quality-improvement.
Consultancy firms
There are a large number of consultancy firms involved in knowledge management projects. An example is Cap Gemini Ernst & Young, responsible for the original KnowME tool. Some companies pay special attention to the improvement of documentary information access and usage.
An example is CELT Consultancy: 'an independent bureau working in domains where organisation, knowledge management and provision of information influence each other. Information management covers the strategic, tactical and operational activities of management that are needed to ensure an optimal provision of information in an organisation. This can only be true if it is embedded in the organisation's strategy.' 5
5 http://www.celt.nl
