1 / 34

A Personal Working Model markrogergregory

A Personal Working Model www.markrogergregory.net. Mark Gregory ESC Rennes School of Business, France mark.gregory@esc-rennes.fr Dr. Renaud Macgilchrist ESC Rennes School of Business, France renaud.macgilchrist@esc-rennes.fr. Director of Studies

emele
Télécharger la présentation

A Personal Working Model markrogergregory

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. A Personal Working Modelwww.markrogergregory.net Mark Gregory ESC Rennes School of Business, France mark.gregory@esc-rennes.fr Dr. Renaud Macgilchrist ESC Rennes School of Business, France renaud.macgilchrist@esc-rennes.fr Director of Studies Prof. David Weir, University Campus Suffolk Supervisor Dr. Renaud Macgilchrist ESC Rennes

  2. Presentation themes • A model of a Personal Working Model • The context of my research: personal information management systems • The motivation, justification and methodology for my research, including some contributions I hope to make as I answer my research question • Why a Working Model must exist • Ways in which to model the Working Model and its components

  3. A Personal Working Model

  4. Personal data: a shopping list Table structure Columns: header gives meaning Rows

  5. The phenomenon: people keep and use data as they get their work done • The phenomenon I am investigating is the personal knowledge management of individual knowledge workers as they carry out their work • This constitutes a personal work system (Baskerville 2011) in which the primary systemic element is the worker, who interacts with her personal data as it is stored on and made available by means of information and communications technology • Baskerville calls the computer-specific element of this an individual information system

  6. Personal information management within the personal work system • (Paul 2010) defines an information system as ICT in use • In (Gregory 2012) I identify the personal information management system and suggest that this is substantially the same thing as Baskerville’s IIS • There remain unresolved boundary issues here! Where does the personal work system end and the personal information management system begin?

  7. What do I mean by a PIMS? A personal information management system is constituted when someone uses ICT – here a spreadsheet – to store data which subsequently informs decisions or action. The “systemic” element – the knowledge-wielding, learning element of the system – is the person who uses the information. The information is filtered data associated with meaning, here “simple” column headings. But in fact there is nothing simple about this process of attributing meaning. How “meaningful” would this data be if the content and headings were in a natural language you didn’t understand?

  8. My original two-part research question How do knowledge workers manage their personal information and knowledge? How can knowledge workers be helped to improve their personal knowledge management (PKM) by means of a useful and applicable teaching, learning and evaluation framework?

  9. The law of requisite variety put forward by Ross Ashby can be stated thus: “Variety absorbs variety, defines the minimum number of states necessary for a controller to control a system of a given number of states” (Ashby 1956) New insight: Obeying the Laws - 1

  10. (Conant & Ashby 1970): Good Regulator theorem, “Every good regulator of a system must be a model of that system... The design of a complex regulator includes the making or maintenance of a model of the system to be regulated. The theorem shows that any regulator that is maximally both successful and simple must be isomorphic with the system being regulated.” New insight: Obeying the Laws - 2

  11. Good Regulator Theory: Significance The regulator or control system must be capable of creating requisite variety Conant and Ashby claimed great generality for their theory See (Scholten, 2010a), (Scholten, 2010b) for a primer and an exegesis: “Every Good Key Must Be A Model Of The Lock It Opens” Major implications for IS theory and practice E.g. we have got to be serious about teaching and practising modelling; and IS has things to teach hackers! (and much to learn too).

  12. A revised RQ formulation and how that has changed my research What is the contribution of personal information management systems PIMS to the Working Model and personal work system of knowledge workers? Necessary precursor: appropriate modelling mechanisms Ideally a direct regulator which is an active isomorphic model At least homomorphic

  13. Personal work systems • For each knowledge worker (Drucker 1999): • We posit the existence of a Personal Work System PWS that is individual to each person • That PWS is supported by a Personal Information Management System PIMS: (Gregory & Descubes 2011a, b) • Broadly the same as Individual Information Systems IIS supporting personal and work-related Work Systems: (Baskerville 2011) • Very similar to a User Generated Information System UGIS: (DesAutels 2011)

  14. Knowledge representation: KR We need to model the model… Existing KR techniques vary in their: Expressiveness Precision Ease of comprehension The more abstract, the more precise we can be in expression and manipulation (potentially even by machine); but less generally applicable, and more difficult to learn Knowledge workers cannot really survive only with one KR approach Especially if that is « just » natural language

  15. Conceprocity: Concept Process Reciprocity Conceprocity – concept ↔ process reciprocity – is a visual and textual language and toolset intended for capturing, expressing, communicating and co-creating models of topic areas of domain knowledge by domain experts or learners Semi-formal semantics – human emphasis, used when investigating problem situations; but grammar rules exist and are partially enforced The first contribution of my PhD

  16. Main symbols

  17. Example KR: a Conceprocity map of planning and doing the shopping Source: author

  18. Dictionary for “Do the shopping”

  19. An abductive insight • It is a surprising fact that people get things done despite not having an explicit regulatory model nor an obvious personal information management system • Possible abductive explanation: people must and do have implicit regulators in the form of so-called mental models which are homomorphic (somewhat isomorphic) with the reality • Model-informed & self-managed action & process • So what are the models and what PIMS have they de facto constructed?

  20. “Reality” and models: discovering the PWS Life and work of individual: task focus The Personal Working Model: a conceptual model of a person’s individualwork system Concept map Data and Information model Analysis Analysed system:conceptual model Assembling tools or creating them: Data / Presentation /Integration [ / Scripting] The work system and the information system used by the individual Synthesis Personal Information Management System supporting Personal Work System 20

  21. Methodology and techniques Structured auto-ethnography: telling my own action-story as I seek to understand and to prototype better techniques Re-viewing the literature of personal information management PIM by means of fuzzy concept maps (Leximancer), demonstrating the gap – no systems view Mentored action research with research participants leading to designed concept maps

  22. Research data analysis: fuzzy concept maps Semi-automatic semantic analysis using Leximancer This will permit a more objective categorisation process and may even give rise to emergent personal ontology Data to be analysed is text: Collected auto-ethnographically by Research Mentor and Research Partners Collected also from students

  23. An analysis of my PhD journal

  24. A Model of a Personal Working Model

  25. The Personal Work System PWS of a knowledge worker

  26. Components of a personal information management system PIMS

  27. Research objectivesand motivation • Objective - To discover by mixed research methods: • How each individual’s Personal (Baskerville 2011) Work System (Alter 1999, 2010) PWS can better be supported by her Personal Information Management System PIMS • How to help people to improve their PIMS and PWS via explicit modelling and implicit learning (by both research volunteer and researcher mentor) • To understand how to “surface” the Working Model • Motivation • Desire to be engaged in relevant and even passionate research and related teaching

  28. Further research - 1

  29. Further research - 2

  30. Existing and developing contributions from my Ph.D. research to date • Initial diffusion • Twelve conference papers • Website: www.markrogergregory.net, designed to draw in volunteers • Conceprocity’s two dialects • CAPRICE: for students • Empirical investigation in S1 2013/4 as MSc students had to model the concepts and relationships present in an academic paper concerning e-commerce – loose guidance • S2: tight guidance to PGE IS Minor students • CAPRILOPE: for practitioners; empirical work with research volunteers as I and they model their personal work systems • Volunteers welcome!

  31. Planned contributions from my Ph.D. • Conceptualisation and illustration of the individual working models of certain individuals, starting with me – see earlier slides. Action research. • Analysis of unschooled and schooled Conceprocity mapping by students: how useful? Action learning. • An insistence on modelling – not an optional extra… • All leading to a synthesised statement of requirements for effective PIM tools and systems - based on action research outcomes • Practically relevant teaching, learning, mentoring and self-evaluation approach • Recognise shortcomings in this research and set out a programme for later research – this was the abduction, now what about other logics of enquiry?

  32. Next steps: five more months to complete my research • Intervening minimally (“loose”) and significantly (“tight”) in concept mapping carried out by students; S1 & S2 2013/4 • Intervening by means of mentoring of research volunteers; May to September 2014 • Federated by a web-based community of practice, www.teamkim.org (currently under construction; full availability late spring 2014) • Limited further auto-ethnography

  33. Take home messages • Models are necessary; we have a duty to help people understand that • Models exist; we must help to make them more explicit • Control – management – mandates good modelling and requisite variety • Each of us should endeavour to build good regulators – a good Working Model – and to help others to do so

  34. Presentation references • Alter, S., 1999. A general, yet useful theory of information systems. Communications of the AIS 1, 3. • Alter, S., 2010. Work system concepts as the core for teaching Information Systems and Operations Management. AMCIS 2010 Proceedings 533. • Ashby, W.R., 1956. An introduction to cybernetics. Chapman & Hall London. • Baskerville, R.L., 2011. Individual information systems as a research arena. Eur J InfSyst 20, 251–254. doi:10.1057/ejis.2011.8 • Conant, R.C., Ashby, W.R., 1970. Every good regulator of a system must be a model of that system. International journal of systems science 1, 89–97. • DesAutels, P., 2011. UGIS: Understanding the nature of user-generated information systems. Business Horizons 54, 185–192. • Drucker, P.F., 1999. Knowledge-worker productivity: The biggest challenge. The knowledge management yearbook 2000–2001. • Gregory, M., 2012. A reflection on Personal Information Management Systems. Presented at the PIM Workshop 2012, part of CHI 2012, Seattle, WA. • Gregory, M., Descubes, I., 2011a. Structured reflection in Information Systems Teaching and Research. Presented at the UKAIS 2011: Proceedings of the 2011 conference of the United Kingdom Academy for Information Systems, St. Catherine’s College, Oxford, April 2011, Oxford, England. • Gregory, M., Descubes, I., 2011b. Understanding PIMS: Personal Information Management Systems. Research Journal of Economics, Business and ICT 2011, 31–37. • Paul, R.J., 2010. Motivation for Writing the Paper What an Information System Is, and Why Is It Important to Know This: Why I Give Lectures and Seminars. Journal of Computing and Information Technology 18. • Rodriguez, N., Ryave, A., 2002. Systematic self-observation. Sage Publications, Inc. • Scholten, D.P., 2010a. A Primer For Conant & Ashby’s “Good-Regulator Theorem.” • http://www.goodregulatorproject.org/images/A_Primer_For_Conant_And_Ashby_s_Good-Regulator_Theorem.pdf • Scholten, D.P., 2010b. Every Good Key Must Be A Model Of The Lock It Opens (The Conant & Ashby Theorem Revisited). Refs: D:\Q\PhD\A Working Model.docx

More Related