Follow Us

 

   Follow PhaseWare on Twitter

Receive New Posts in your Email

Your email:

Links and Websites

The PhaseWare Files:
Articles, Observations, and Ideas
about Customer Support

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

Knowledge Management: Some thoughts on Folksonomy versus Taxonomy


One of the biggest challenges in the management of knowledge and content, be it papers, books, or electronically from a database perhaps, has been to create a method to organize and mark the information in such a way that it can be found again when the need arises. This goes all the way back to the libraries of Alexandria. So the fundamental knowledge management issue that companies face is not new. For centuries people have searched for ways to organize and share information easily.

Most recently the practice of tagging and the building of folksonomies are being used as a way to allow any content creator or content user to organize and label knowledge in a way that makes sense to them.Over time a group of users/creators may build a type of taxonomy that is intuitive to them and easy to apply. There are few to no hierarchical relationships to deal with, no attempting to match a predetermined term to a piece of information that may not quite fit. Folksonomies are a joint venture that is extremely immediate and responsive to a user base.

On the other hand, tagging without a common base of understanding can quickly become unworkable. There is a lot of ambiguity inherent in this type of system since the same word or tag may not mean the same to each member of a group. If a new member joins a group that has a stable tagging system, that member may be expected to tag in ways similar or the same as the rest of the group. Eventually the folksonomy starts to resemble and be treated as a taxonomy with the rules of usage that tagging and folksonomies tend to avoid.

So what is the answer? I think that no matter how information is organized there will always be a learning curve in finding information in any system, whether it is a controlled vocabulary with a formal hierarchical taxonomy or a flat form tagging effort. An easy way to meet in the middle for both users and creators of content has yet to be found. But we must persevere. With the volume of information available today and the creation of more, companies must be able to find sense in the blizzard of data that is being produced so it can be used to grow the business and find and retain customers.

This post rambles a little but I hope to hear your thoughts on the organization of knowledge. And I expect to post more on the subject in the coming weeks because knowledge management is here to stay and is sorely needed.



Comments

http://it.toolbox.com/people/valeriydik/ 
10/22/2008 # 
I think that Knowledge Management is more related to problem of knowledge sharing/perceiving. If people are not willing to share, there is no chance to use any -sonomy. It's more about a common identity of group/team/organization members rather than implementation matters. This is the main issue. 
However, if a group has a common ground to stay on, it doesn't matter what way to go to organize the data. My personal opinion is not to use any tags in a collaborative environment - but to use a powerful indexing instead. This is the most suitable way to share and use any knowledge.
Posted @ Thursday, October 23, 2008 9:57 PM by Jody Pellerin
10/22/2008 # 
Hoyt Mann replies: 
I agree that if the members of a group are not willing to share knowledge, as I know does happen when someone has a vested interest in keeping power by keeping information to themselves. However, it is becoming imperative for group members to give up those ways of retaining power because collaboration is today's keyword for how we work. If a member cannot work collaboratively, then it is possible that member will become marginalized instead of empowered. 
 
Also, there is still the problem of knowledge sharing across an enterprise or community. If, for instance, there is a commonly used knowledge base or wiki, there is the need for people to find or mark and organize information so it is useful to them and to the group as a whole. Myself, I would prefer to use a more structured taxonomic method with good indexing but tagging seems to be thought of as a way to allow anyone to participate in the activity without need for specialized training. 
 
The true answer probably lies in between. Information scientists and librarians have been at this for a long time, trying to determine how people classify information in an effort to create a usable retrieval system. Social media has simply gone ahead with the tagging effort. May the two come together some day.
Posted @ Thursday, October 23, 2008 9:58 PM by Jody Pellerin
http://it.toolbox.com/people/valeriydik/ 
10/22/2008 
You mean that it's possible to combine wiki-like tagging and indexing? I agree. But it makes sense only if a strict tagging approach is in use, which eliminates the very author's subjectivity. Otherwise, indexing+tagging advantages go to zero since tags are not perceived by a reader as a source of truth any more. 
I admit that there may be very effective tagging techniques which complement indexing very well. But at the moment I'm not aware of any of them.
Posted @ Thursday, October 23, 2008 9:59 PM by Jody Pellerin
vladimir.mininel writes:  
 
10/24/2008 
 
Tagging presupposes a meta-knowledge about the knowledge being tagged. We must then communicate this new meta-knowledge. And it can be an endless task, requiring a new meta-meta-knowledge. 
 
Taxonomies must be built dynamically, according to our immediate needs and then applied to the knowledge base. Pre-built taxonomies narrow the search and force us to know each one in advance. Ontologies can then coordinate the search engine and resolve ambiguity, incompleteness and inaccuracy.
Posted @ Thursday, November 06, 2008 9:44 PM by Jody Pellerin
Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics

Receive email when someone replies.