Good document management is essential for knowledge sharing.

IMPACTS

Document management systems are the most effective way to share document-based information over an enterprise. The definition of DMS (Document Management Systems) is vague and the distinction between DMS, CMS (Content Management Systems), and Portal software sometimes blurred. For the purposes of this document DMS will be defined as ‘configurable content delivery and storage mechanisms’.

DMS has many advantages over a traditional file system when used as a knowledge base and delivery mechanism. DMS have extensible document meta-data that supports document searching, version control, indexing, access control, and contextual grouping (documents can be members of various roles). The data is usually contained within a central storage system (usually a relational database) with Resource control and management functions tightly integrated to the database (Kelly, 1998, p1). Documents can be presented in many different formats, converted between formats (eg Word > HTML), and be presented via a common interface, over the enterprise (e.g. using a Web based front-end). Knowledge sharing can be Synchronous (direct Peer to Peer delivery) or Asynchronous (capture > storage > delivery) (Kochikar, 2000, p2). DMS can alert certain users (individuals or members of roles) when asynchronous files arrive at the storage facility, and facilitate (and log) synchronous delivery. With stored content, metabases (database tables with interrelations between metadata) can, over time, generate new knowledge by recombining existing content from the knowledge base (Telleen, 1997, p1). An example of this would be a (saved) list returned from a search on some search criteria.

Groups (rather than individuals) are now the basic units of work in an organisation. Sophisticated DMS are needed to effectively share information. With concepts like “Group knowledge” individuals need to be able to instantly access any new documents associated with their group or team. They need to be able to quickly search on related documents, compare with existing documents, be sure that current versions are up to date, and they need a mechanism to publish their own content to other members of their group. This then applies to groups of groups and organisation wide, virtual communities (Ferran-Urdaneta, 1999, p2-3). There needs to be a high level of competence-based trust (Levin, Cross, Abrams, Lesser, 2002, p2) between members of groups or communities. Document metadata can help increase the level of competence-based trust. New knowledge must be legitimized, good DMS can be configured to prioritise data delivery of official documents or documents from highly trusted groups or individuals. Communities, which are generally organisation wide, also benefit from this trust relationship, being the most effective mechanism for large-scale knowledge sharing (Ferran-Urdaneta, 1999, p6).

The real benefits of using good DMS in an enterprise for knowledge sharing and transfer can be seen when they are integrated with other applications. This can be CRM packages, HR packages, project management tools, company extranets, e-learning packages, larger CMS, and a number of other applications. The most important component that is distinctly separate from the document management system is a company wide consistent front end. Currently, web based Portal software that can be exposed as an intranet or extranet is the best way of providing this consistency over even the most highly distributed environment.

JUSTIFICATION

(Ferran-Urdaneta, 1999, p4) says, “Learning at the organisational level is the only source of sustainable advantage”. This means that an organisation as a whole constitutes an “entity” that has knowledge that does not rely on any individual in that organisation. (Kochikar, 2000, p3) has developed metrics for measuring an organisations ability to share knowledge. At the highest level the organisation is called a “knowledge leader” and organizational knowledge boundaries are effectively transparent. The prerequisites for this level are described below:

· The organisation is a net “giver” of learning (i.e. it gives more information than it receives). This requires a highly configurable document management system.

· Knowledge is free flowing, with no “temporal or special decay”. A meta-data document management system is needed that auto updates.

· Large-scale reuse. The system needs to be able to integrate with a consistent, commonly used front end.

· Support for virtual teamwork. Again, metadata can facilitate this with roles and versioning.

There are a number of success stories associated with DMS, here are just a few: Xerox is a team-based organisation that has successfully used web-based document management systems to share knowledge over a distributed environment (Rein, Gail, McCue, Daniel, Slein, Judith, 1997, p2). Alliant energy have used Documentum as their enterprise wide CMS, which in their words “Creates a document management and knowledge-sharing foundation for the future” (Alliant,Documentum, 2003, p1). IBM’s Knowledge Management strategy (which began in 1993 and now uses web based DMS) has saved the company $200 in training costs alone (Essex, 2003, p1). Finally, CMA has realized substantial savings (approx $100,000 a year) by using an extranet to facilitate knowledge sharing across the telecommunications industry (OpenText, 2002, p1).

FUTURE DIRECTION

Here are some predictions for the future of DMS:

· As bandwidth increases DMS will be able to deliver a larger variety of content types over the wire to distributed locations. Video feeds and other kinds of streamed data may replace more traditional “document types” like text, doc and pdf files.

· More XML standardisation and the use of standard protocols for network and internetwork content delivery like reliable SOAP over webservices (which can handle binary payloads) (Microsoft, 2003, p3).

· Newer and more intelligent document search algorithms, that can be used in conjunction with some of the features provided by up and coming releases of various database platforms. Examples include the OLAP (Online Analytical Processing) and real-time data mining in “Yukon” and the new incarnation of DB2 (Hicks, 2002, p1).

· Improved collaboration (e.g. communities and virtual teams) facilities. I.e. better team and community management metadata, taxonomy support, and team based automation.

REFERENCES

· Teams or Communities? Organizational Structures for Knowledge Management, 1999 Ferran-Urdaneta, Carlos

· A Case for Document Functions on the Web, 1997 Rein, Gail L., McCue, Daniel L., Slein, Judith A.

· The knowledge management maturity model - A staged framework for leveraging knowledge, 2000 VP Kochikar http://www.infy.com/knowledge_capital/knowledge/KMWorld00_B304.pdf

· Intranets as Knowledge management Systems, 1997 Steven L. Telleen

· Trust and knowledge sharing: A critical combination, 2002 Daniel Z. Levin, Rob Cross, Lisa C. Abrams and Eric L. Lesser http://www-1.ibm.com/services/strategy/e_strategy/trust.html

· What are...Document management systems?, 1998 Brian Kelly http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue17/what-is/

· Knowledge management programs pay big dividends, 2003 David Essex http://www.itworld.com/App/236/ITW1795/page_1.html

· Livelink facilitates knowledge sharing across the Telecom Industry, 2002 OpenText http://www.opentext.net/customers/case_studies/livelink_case_study_cma.pdf

· Improving Utility Operations By Effectively Sharing and Managing Business Critical Knowledge, 2003 Alliant, documentum http://www.documentum.com/customer_success/success/alliant.htm

· Ws-ReliableMessaging, 2003 Microsoft http://msdn.microsoft.com/webservices/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dnglobspec/html/ws-reliablemessaging.asp

· Real-Time Data Analysis Due in DB2, 'Yukon', 2002 Matt Hicks http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,302468,00.asp