More for the Data Warehouse PractitionerRalph Kimball has created an excellent checklist rating the “Dimensional Data Warehouse” (April 28, 2000). However, he has explained all the parameters except those under the expression criterion. I think it would have been helpful to explain some of the subtle differences among the dimensions, as well. Also, ways to store statistical or financial ratio manipulations within tables could be an additional parameter under the administration criterion. Another administration parameter is whether software creates a new dimensional database or uses meta/index databases.
Arthur Hem Community FeedbackDenham Grey launched a discussion topic on knowledge management (KM) practices at the IntelligentKM Forum at IntelligentKM.com His topic has drawn some eloquent responses from the KM community. Grey initially posted these observations: [It] seems [to me] there is far too much focus on knowledge models, KM process, and technology in KM circles and too little attention paid to practice. I have been following the KM literature closely since 1994, [and] have yet to see a key article on how knowledge is created, shared, [or] structured that describes the basic practices in sufficient detail to allow you to implement them. We all seem to be looking for “low hanging fruits,” chasing content aggregation and navigation (portals and intranets), reuse (best practices and lessons learned), document flow, collaborative work, communication, and coordination. Critique, community ethos, validation of ideas, integration and synthesis of understanding, making of distinctions, developing shared meaning, awareness, and joint sensitivity to emergent issues, strengthening of identity and deep dialog seldom attract attention. Yet to my way of thinking, [these are] the wellspring and the heart of KM, the value driver[s] that will keep KM in business! My contention is that knowledge practices, [defined as] how we work with each other (culture), adapt and adopt tools and the artifacts we create, encounter and pass along, are the key to making progress in KM. What do you think? Dave Head, one of those who responded, made some intriguing points: I have to agree that there seems to be an overabundance of attention paid to the “science” of knowledge management. The literature and discussion available tends to paint KM in the light of a scholarly discussion rather than [as] a practical and functional business process. My background is with two separate consulting organizations. At both I have served as knowledge manager. I come from a technical background, so my focus has always been on the systems that enable KM. I believe that the reason so much [of the] focus is [on] the technical side of the equation is that it is the one that is most “real” and capable of action. [I have had many discussions with] colleagues who deal with this issue about the theoretical nature of the overall discussion and the lack of resources to address functional KM issues (other than those that deal with technology). The discussions that surround the people issues (culture, tacit vs. explicit, capturing what people know) tend to be very similar in content. These discussions lack any real roadmap for addressing the issues. Given the lack of support I’ve seen for KM in the organizations I’ve worked for, it makes it very difficult to effect change on the people front, as these issues are more effectively dealt with in other areas of the company (HR, Executive Imperative, and so on). Given all of this, my focus has become one of implementing systems and processes that will show some tangible value, and working in the back-ground to begin the process of effecting changes in [the] culture and attitude toward KM. The one major lesson I have learned in all of this is that these activities take a very long time to produce results, and that providing a supportive infrastructure and a customer service attitude goes a long way towards getting the buy-in necessary to make KM successful.
Join this discussion or launch your own in the community forums at IntelligentCRM.com, IntelligentEAI.com, IntelligentERP.com, and IntelligentKM.com.
We Need Your Vote!
The Readers’ Choice Awards 2000 ballot is now live at IntelligentEnterprise.com We’ve expanded the number of categories and eligible products this year, and we need maximum participation to ensure we receive the broadest range of opinions possible. Please take a moment to cast your vote for the products you consider most important to your job function in the past year. Have kudos, reprimands, advice, or commentary to share with us and other Intelligent Enterprise readers? Then send your thoughts to the editors via email, fax, or snail mail (information is to the right), and be sure to include your name and city of residence. Your message may appear in the Closed Loop department. |
 |
Most Popular This Week
IE Weekly Newsletter
Subscribe to the newsletter
| |
|
|