|
|
| (10 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | {{Event
| + | Hi. I treasured to drop you a quick note to imarpt my thanks. I've been observing your blog for a month or so and have picked up a heap of good information as well as enjoyed the way you've structured your site. I am attempting to run my own blog however I think its too general and I would like to focus more on smaller topics. |
| − | |Acronym=PKM 2009
| |
| − | |Title=Personal Knowledge Management 2009
| |
| − | |Type=Workshop
| |
| − | |Field=Information systems
| |
| − | |Superevent=KM 2009
| |
| − | |Start date=2009/03/25
| |
| − | |End date=2009/03/27
| |
| − | |Logo=Logo-pkm-2009.png
| |
| − | |City=Solothurn
| |
| − | |Country=Switzerland
| |
| − | |Paper deadline=2008/10/31
| |
| − | |Notification=2008/12/15
| |
| − | |Camera ready=2009/01/16
| |
| − | }}
| |
| − | ''Source'' [[Homepage::http://personalknowledge.org]]
| |
| − | | |
| − | [[Category:Knowledge Management]]
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | Knowledge Management (KM) deals with creating and exchanging knowledge within groups of persons in organisational contexts. The potentials and needs of the individual is often not in the focus of KM efforts, although no-one would deny that the individual as knowledge bearer, -user and -creator is naturally the most essential part of knowledge management. The main goal of PKM is make the individual more productive - and thereby the organisation as a whole.
| |
| − | | |
| − | The term Personal Knowledge Management (PKM) has two main dimensions:
| |
| − | | |
| − | * Personal Knowledge - Ultimately, all knowledge is personal knowledge. Following the tradition of Nonaka&Takeuchis spiral model (and later Ba model) knowledge resides partially in the minds of people and can partially be codified as external artifacts. PKM investigates the use of methods and tools to amplify the abilities of the individual to work better with knowledge. E.g.
| |
| − | o recall previously learned knowledge faster (or at all) when it is required
| |
| − | o model personal knowledge and beliefs with external modeling tools to derive new insights (MS Excel is often used for this today)
| |
| − | o strategies for filing ideas to retrieve them when needed
| |
| − | | |
| − | * Personal Management - Management is a systematic approach to define goals, measure, define and execute actions and repeat this control loop until the goal is reached. Different from traditional management, in personal management one has to manage oneself. This involves the problem of fulfilling two roles (executing and managing) and learning when and how to switch between them. Typical management problems in PKM are e.g.
| |
| − | o time and task management
| |
| − | o matching work habits with personal productivity level variations
| |
| − | o investing time into personal learning and PKM improvements
| |
| − | o work-life balance
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | Audience
| |
| − | | |
| − | We invite practitioners and academic researchers alike to collaborate on the interdisciplinary topic of PKM.
| |
| − | | |
| − | * Academic researchers might come from KM-related disciplines such as economics, computer science, education science, business informatics, or information sciences but to explore the individual aspects also contributions from fields such as cognitive psychology, brain science andHCI are invited.
| |
| − | | |
| − | * Practitioners might work as consultants, tool vendors, or user in knowledge-intensive industries. We invite especially pragmatic early adopters and interested students. No submission to the workshop is required in order to participate. We will run a lighting talk round to collect the positions of all participants.
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | Research questions
| |
| − | | |
| − | o How can an individual effectively and efficiently use external tools to amplify his abilities to handle knowledge in large quantities and /or with high complexity?
| |
| − | o How can the individual support, structure and improve his personal knowledge management and individual knowledge creation,-modeling, -usage and -development?
| |
| − | o How can the conflict between personal goals (e.g. motivation) and the goals of an organisation (e.g. efficient knowledge sharing, productivity) be tackled or even resolved?
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | Foundational questions such as
| |
| − | | |
| − | * theoretical foundations of PKM (e.g. from cognitive psychology, cognitive ergonomics, etc.),
| |
| − | * extension of established KM-methods with PKM-specific aspects,
| |
| − | * results from work sciences about characteristics of and potential for support of individual knowledge work,
| |
| − | * legal questions (e.g. which knowledge must be shared or may not be shared, privacy issues arising from user observation by tools)
| |
| − | * relations of PKM to related topics (e. g. ePortfolio and competence/skill management and development),
| |
| − | * methods for self-management and PKM key competencies (e.g. time management, task management, stress management, social networking).
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | Methods and tools such as
| |
| − | | |
| − | * those for personal knowledge articulation (e.g. knowledge mapping, editable visualisations, step-wise formalisation),
| |
| − | * personal wikis, semantics desktop, personal storage and search solutions,
| |
| − | * extending PIM tools and methods for PKM, creativity tools and personal idea management,
| |
| − | * innovative use of new technologies (e.g. mobile devices, speech recognition, ePaper),
| |
| − | * the link from personal to shared knowledge models,
| |
| − | * tools for computer-supported personal work (CSPW) in contrast to and combination with CSCW.
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | Applications and case studies such as
| |
| − | | |
| − | * long-term studies,
| |
| − | * lab experiments,
| |
| − | * products and best practices,
| |
| − | * evaluation of personal knowledge work and supporting tools
| |
| − | | |
| − |
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | Goals
| |
| − | The PKM 2009 workshop marks the begin of a workshop series aiming to provide a forum to discuss in an interdisciplinary fashion all aspects of PKM in theory and practice. By reflecting critically and building on existing practitioner (consultants, tool vendors, early adaptors) experiences and research results we aim to establish PKM as a sub-field of KM.
| |
| − | | |
| − |
| |
| − | | |
| − | Submissions
| |
| − | | |
| − | We invite submissions
| |
| − | | |
| − | * up to 8-10 pages
| |
| − | * LNI style (http://www.gi-ev.de/service/publikationen/lni/ )
| |
| − | * in German or English,
| |
| − | * dealing with any of the above mentioned topics.
| |
| − | | |
| − | To stimulate a rich, interdisciplinary discussion we expect explicitly not only formal scientific papers but also position papers, overview articles, tool descriptions, case studies, etc. The type of work and current status has to be clearly indicated, e.g. in a chapter "future work", "status of implementation" or "limitations".
| |
| − | | |
| − | We can accept only submissions in PDF-Format via the WM conference management system (http://www.km-conference2009.org/submissions.php). For each accepted paper at least one author has to register at the conference and present the paper in the workshop. Participation in the workshop without a submitted or accepted paper is invited, too. Each workshop participant must be registered at the WM conference.
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | Every submission is reviewed by at least two Program Committee members. The reviews are mostly intended as a quality control and -improvement and less as a selection procedure. Each presented in the workshop is expected to read another submission critically (and constructive!) to ask in-depth questions at the workshop and to provide a counter position to launch lively discussions.
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | All papers will be published as CEUR proceedings. A selected subset (based on reviewers comments) will be published additionally as printed LNI proceedings.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Workshop Format
| |
| − | | |
| − | We hope to get enough high-quality submissions to run a full-day workshop - investigating a new interdisciplinary topic requires a larger proportion of discussion than in established fields. Submissions will be presented as long talks, short talks and lightning talks (position statements of participants without papers). Each presenter gets assigned beforehand a "challenger" to stimulate a critical and constructive discussion.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Some time of the workshop is reserved for group discussion to clarify and consolidate terms, topics and goals of participants.
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | Program Committee
| |
| − | | |
| − | * Prof. Marco Bettoni-de Vries, Fernfachhochschule Schweiz (CH)
| |
| − | * Dr. Ernst Biesalski, EnBW AG, Karlsruhe (D)
| |
| − | * Magdalena Böttger, netvibes.com, München (D)
| |
| − | * Lilia Efimova, Telematica Instituut, Enschede (NL)
| |
| − | * Ludger van Elst, DFKI GmbH Kaiserslautern (D)
| |
| − | * Anja Flicker, Reinisch GmbH Karlsruhe, (D)
| |
| − | * Prof. Dr. Stefan Güldenberg, WU Wien (A) confirmation pending
| |
| − | * Dr. Siegfried Handschuh, DERI Galway (IE)
| |
| − | * Prof. Dr. Martin Eppler, Universität Lugano (CH)
| |
| − | * Dr. Claudia Müller, Universität Potsdam (D)
| |
| − | * Dr. Eyal Oren, VU Amsterdam (NL) confirmation pending
| |
| − | * Dr. Uwe Riss, SAP Research, CEC Karlsruhe (D)
| |
| − | * Martin Roell, Dresden (D)
| |
| − | * Leo Sauermann, DFKI GmbH, Kaiserslautern (D)
| |
| − | * Swaran Sandhu, Universität Luzern (CH) confirmation pending
| |
| − | * Dr. Sigmar-Olaf Tergan, ex Institut für Wissensmedien, Tübingen (D)
| |
| − | * Denny Vrandecic, Institut AIFB, Universität Karlsruhe (D)
| |
| − | * Dr. Reinhard Willfort, innovation (AT)
| |
| − | * Ton Zijlstra, independent consultant, Enschede (NL)
| |
