MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2214226438 · doi:10.18438/b8vp4x

Informed Systems: Enabling Collaborative Evidence Based Organizational Learning

2015· article· en· W2214226438 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mary M. Somerville, Niki Chatzipanagiotou

Notice bibliographique

RevueEvidence Based Library and Information Practice · 2015
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineDecision Sciences
ThématiqueComplex Systems and Decision Making
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésKnowledge managementInformation systemProcess (computing)Computer scienceOrganizational learningCollaborative learningSoft systems methodologyPsychologySociologyManagement information systemsEngineering

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract
 
 Objective – In response to unrelenting disruptions in academic publishing and higher education ecosystems, the Informed Systems approach supports evidence based professional activities to make decisions and take actions. This conceptual paper presents two core models, Informed Systems Leadership Model and Collaborative Evidence-Based Information Process Model, whereby co-workers learn to make informed decisions by identifying the decisions to be made and the information required for those decisions. This is accomplished through collaborative design and iterative evaluation of workplace systems, relationships, and practices. Over time, increasingly effective and efficient structures and processes for using information to learn further organizational renewal and advance nimble responsiveness amidst dynamically changing circumstances.
 
 Methods – The integrated Informed Systems approach to fostering persistent workplace inquiry has its genesis in three theories that together activate and enable robust information usage and organizational learning. The information- and learning-intensive theories of Peter Checkland in England, which advance systems design, stimulate participants’ appreciation during the design process of the potential for using information to learn. Within a co-designed environment, intentional social practices continue workplace learning, described by Christine Bruce in Australia as informed learning enacted through information experiences. In addition, in Japan, Ikujiro Nonaka’s theories foster information exchange processes and knowledge creation activities within and across organizational units. In combination, these theories promote the kind of learning made possible through evolving and transferable capacity to use information to learn through design and usage of collaborative communication systems with associated professional practices. Informed Systems therein draws from three antecedent theories to create an original theoretical approach.
 
 Results – Over time and with practice, as co-workers design and enact information-focused and evidence based learning experiences, they learn the way to decision-making and action-taking. Increasingly more complex experiences of information exchange, sense making, and knowledge creation, well supported by workplace communication systems and professional practices, further dialogue and reflection and thereby enrich analysis and interpretation of complexities and interdependencies.
 
 Conclusions - Research projects and evaluation studies conducted since 2003 demonstrate the transformative potential of the holistic Informed Systems approach to creating robust workplace learning environments. Leaders are responsible for design of workplace environments supportive of well contextualized, information-rich conversations. Co-workers revisit both the nature of organizational information and the purpose of organizational work. As colleagues better understand the complexities of the organization and its situation, they learn to diagnose problems and identify consequences, guided by Informed Systems models. Systemic activity and process models activate collaborative evidence based information processes within enabling conditions for thought leadership and workplace learning that recognize learning is social. Enabling communication systems and professional practices therefore intentionally catalyze and support collegial inquiry to co-create information experiences and organizational knowledge through evidence based practice to enliven capacity, inform decisions, produce improvements, and sustain relationships. The Informed Systems approach is thereby a contribution to professional practice and workplace renewal through evidence based decision-making and action-taking in contemporary organizations.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,007
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,191
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche, Communication savante
Catégories consensuellesCommunication savante
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,938
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,996

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0070,191
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,004
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0050,309
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,117
Tête enseignante GPT0,370
Écart entre enseignants0,253 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations4
Publié2015
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEvidence Based Library and Information PracticeMême sujetComplex Systems and Decision MakingTravaux en français237 207