MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2214226438 · doi:10.18438/b8vp4x

Informed Systems: Enabling Collaborative Evidence Based Organizational Learning

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

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence Based Library and Information Practice · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKnowledge managementInformation systemProcess (computing)Computer scienceOrganizational learningCollaborative learningSoft systems methodologyPsychologySociologyManagement information systemsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from 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.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.191
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.191
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0050.309
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.117
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence Based Library and Information PracticeSame topicComplex Systems and Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207