Comments on: Contribution and Discovery

By: Contribution Engines « Infovark

Contribution Engines « Infovark — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 15:36:43 +0000

[...] Masterton left a great comment on my post about contribution and discovery. It’s prompted me to think some more about contribution [...]

By: Library clips :: The ubiquity of social tools in context of workflows :: September :: 2008

Fri, 26 Sep 2008 00:00:13 +0000

[...] Not long ago I wrote a post called “7 seconds to knowledge share” based on a post at Infovark. [...]

By: Library clips :: 7 seconds to knowledge share :: August :: 2008

Library clips :: 7 seconds to knowledge share :: August :: 2008 — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 23:12:07 +0000

[...] Gordon from Inforvark has a piece on why KM didn’t work, due to it’s non-humanistic processes: [...]

By: Daria

Daria — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 14:02:09 +0000

Gordon, I think the problems you are referring to can be united under one name – ease of use. Enterprise 1.0 software is complex and does not provide people with absolute freedom to contribute their knowledge to some common repository. Enterprise 2.0 tools eliminate this problem, making it easier for knowledge workers to share information and collaborate. That’s why these tools are often adopted from the bottom up

By: Gordon

Gordon — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 14:57:16 +0000

Hey Mark!

Haha – on the contrary, having been an active participant in “the great BPM lie”, I think your latest post is brilliant! – I completely agree.

Back to my post – I think you’re also right – If everything is in the cloud, tagging fits very nicely within the seven second window.

By a contribution engine, I’m talking about the “Dark Matter”. There is still an awful lot of content in the enterprise that is not visible – not REST exposed. A lot of this content isn’t taggable because it’s the byproduct of personal communication in direct channels – like email – and it’s business artifacts like documents and reports that people want to retain inside the organization.