Capturing Knowledge

CAPTURING KNOWLEDGE

1 Evaluating the Expert

2 Developing a Relationship with Experts

3 Fuzzy Reasoning and the Quality of Knowledge

3 Fuzzy Reasoning and the Quality of Knowledge

4 Knowledge Capturing Techniques, Brain Storming

5 Protocol Analysis

6 Consensus Decision Making

7 Repertory Grid- Concept Mapping

8 Blackboarding

1 Evaluating the Expert

1.1 Indicators of expertise:

The expert commands genuine respect.The expert is found to be consulted by people in the organization, when some problem arises.

The expert possess self confidence and he/she has a realistic view of the limitations. The expert avoids irrelevant information, uses facts and figures.

The expert is able to explain properly and he/she can customize his/her presentation according to the level of the audience.

The expert exhibits his/her depth of the detailed knowledge and his/her quality of explanation is exceptional.

The expert is not arrogant regarding his/her personal information. deal for building a simple KM system with only few rules.

Ideal when the problem lies within a restricted domain.

The single expert can facilitate the logistics aspects of coordination arrangements for knowledge capture.

Problem related/personal conflicts are easier to resolve. The single expert tends to share more confidentiality.

1.2 Disadvantages of working with a single expert:

^ü   The single expert usually provides a single line of reasoning.

^ü   They are more likely to change meeting schedules.

^ü   Often, the experts knowledge is found to be not easy to capture.

^ü   The knowledge is often found to be dispersed.

1.3Advantages of working with multiple (team) experts:

^ü   Expert Evaluation

^ü   Complex problem domains are usually benefited.

^ü   Stimulates interaction.

^ü   Listening to a multitude of views allows the developer to consider alternative

^ü   ways of representing knowledge.

^ü   Formal meetings are sometimes better environment for generating thoughtful

^ü   contributions.

1.4Disadvantages of working with multiple (team) experts:

^1.5   Disagreements can frequently occur.

^1.6  Coordinating meeting schedules are more complicated.

^1.7 Harder to retain confidentiality.

^1.8  Overlapping mental processes of multiple experts can result in a process loss.

^ü   Often requires more than one knowledge developer.

1.5Experts qualifications:

^ü   The expert should know when to follow hunches, and when to make exceptions.

^ü   The expert should be able to see the big picture.

^ü   The expert should posses good communication skills.

^ü   The expert should be able to tolerate stress.

^ü   The expert should be able to think creatively.

^ü   The expert should be able to exhibit self-confidence in his/her thought and actions.

^ü   The expert should maintain credibility.

^ü   The expert should operate within a schema-driven/structured orientation.

1,6 Expert Evaluation

^ü   The expert should be able to generate enthusiasm as well as motivation.

^ü   The expert should share his/her expertise willingly and without hesitation.

^ü   The expert should use chunked knowledge.

^ü   The expert should emulate an ideal teacher's habits.

^ü   Experts levels of expertise:

^ü   Highly expert persons.

^ü   New experts.

^ü   Capturing single vs multiple experts' tacit knowledge:

2 Developing a Relationship with Experts

Creating the right impression: The knowledge developer must learn to use psychology, common sense, technical as well as marketing skills to attract the experts respect and attention.

Understanding of the expert's style of expression:

Experts are usually found to use one of the following styles of expression: Procedure type: These type of experts are found to be logical, verbal and always procedural.

Storyteller type: These type of experts are found to be focused on the content of the domain at the expense of the solution.

Godfather type: These type of experts are found to be compulsive to take over. Salesperson type: These type of experts are found to spend most of the time dancing around the topic, explaining why his/her solution is the best.

Preparation for the session:

Before making the first appointment, the knowledge developer must acquire some knowledge about the problem and the expert.

Initial sessions can be most challenging/critical.

The knowledge developer must build the trust.

The knowledge developer must be familiar with project terminology d he/she must review the existing documents.

The knowledge developer should be able to make a quick rapport with the expert

Approaching multiple experts:

Individual approach: The knowledge developer holds sessions with one expert at a

time.

Approach using primary and secondary experts Small groups approach

3 Fuzzy Reasoning and the Quality of Knowledge

Sometimes, the information gathered from the experts via interviewing is not precise and it involves fuzziness and uncertainty.

The fuzziness may increase the difficulty of translating the expert's notions into applicable

rules.

3.1 Analogies/Uncertainties:

In the course of explaining events, experts can use analogies (comparing a problem with a similar problem which has been encountered in possibly different settings,

months or years ago).

An expert's knowledge or expertise represents the ability to gather uncertain information as input and to use a plausible line of reasoning to clarify the fuzzy details. People may use different kinds of words in order to express belief.

Belief, an aspect of uncertainty, tends to describe the level of credibility. These words are often paired with qualifiers such as highly, extremely.

3.2 Understanding experience:

Knowledge developers can benefit from their understanding/knowledge of cognitive psychology.

When a question is asked, then an expert operates on certain stored information through deductive, inductive, or other kinds of problem-solving methods.

The resulting answer is often found to be the culmination of the processing of stored information.

The right question usually evokes the memory of experiences that produced good and appropriate solutions in the past.

Fuzzy Reasoning & Quality of Knowledge Capture

Sometimes, how quickly an expert responds to a question depends on the clarity of content, whether the content has been recently used , and how well the expert has understood the question.

3.3 Problem with the language:

How well the expert can represent internal processes can vary with their command of the language they are using and the knowledge developer's interviewing skills.

The lanage may be unclear in the following number of ways: Comparative words (e.g., better, faster) are sometimes left hanging.

Specific words or components may be left out of an explanation. Absolute words and phrases may be used loosely.

Some words always seem to have a built-in ambiguity.

4 Knowledge Capturing Techniques, Brain Storming

^ü   On-Site Observation (Action Protocol)

^ü   Brainstorming

^ü   Electronic Brainstorming

^ü   Protocol Analysis (Think-Aloud Method)

^ü   Consensus Decision Making

^ü   Repertory Grid

^ü   Nominal Group Technique (NGT)

^ü   Delphi Method

^ü   Concept Mapping

^ü   Blackboarding

5 Protocol Analysis

In this case, protocols (scenarios) are collected by asking experts to solve the specific problem and verbalize their decision process by stating directly what they think.

Knowledge developers do not interrupt in the interim.

The elicited information is structured later when the knowledge developer analyzes the protocol.

Here the term scenario refers to a detailed and somehow complex sequence of events or

more

precisely, an episode.

A scenario can involve individuals and objects.

A scenario provides a concrete vision of how some specific human activity can be supported by information technology.

6 Consensus Decision Making

Consensus decision making usually follows brainstorming.

It is effective if and only if each expert has been provided with equal and adequate opportunity to present their views.

In order to arrive at a consensus, the knowledge developer conducting the exercise tries to rally the experts towards one or two alternatives.

The knowledge developer follows a procedure designed to ensure fairness and standardization.

This method is democratic in nature.

This method can be sometimes tedious and can take hours.

7 Repertory Grid- Concept Mapping

This is a tool used for knowledge capture.

The domain expert classifies and categorizes a problem domain using his/her own model. The grid is used for capturing and evaluating the expert's model.

Two experts (in the same problem domain) may produce distinct sets of personal and subjective results.

The grid is a scale (or a bipolar construct) on which elements can be placed within gradations. The knowledge developer usually elicits the constructs and then asks the domain expert to

provide a set of examples called elements.

Each element is rated according to the constructs which have been provided.

8 Blackboarding.

In this case, the experts work together to solve a specific problem using the blackboard as their workspace.

Each expert gets equal opportunity to contribute to the solution via the blackboard.

It is assumed that all participants are experts, but they might have acquired their individual expertise in situations different from those of the other experts in the group.

The process of blackboarding continues till the solution has been reached.