MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969857320 · doi:10.5430/bmr.v8n3p16

Implementing Enterprise Content Management Services with an Agile Approach

2019· article· en· W2969857320 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBusiness and Management Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInformation Systems and Technology Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgile software developmentProcess managementComputer scienceAgile Unified ProcessContext (archaeology)Knowledge managementSoftware developmentSoftwareBusinessSoftware development processSoftware engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Every organisation needs access to fast online data in order to meet increasing customer demands. As a result, the information architecture of a company, how it is designed, and how information is managed are very important. Because the amount of content is growing at a precipitous rate, in order to manage it with the greatest efficacy, an online content management system is recommended. The challenge for organisations is to implement and manage a dynamic content management system that is responsive to changing requirements, while providing a structure that contributes to organisational efficiencies. How a content management system is designed and implemented (e.g. with Office 365, SharePoint, G Suite, or SAP OpenText) determines its success. This paper discusses using Agile approaches for business content management systems, to ensure that they will be used to their full potential.This conceptual research paper looks into the current context of Enterprise Content Management (ECM) and the desirable qualities of an Agile approach. First, the literature review explores the definitions, elements, benefits, and recent trends around ECM. Then, the paper discusses Agile project management (APM) with some major characteristics and typical features. Thirdly, the paper describes how an Agile ECM system should be (e.g., takes advantage of the growing Internet, cloud services, and mobile computing). An Agile ECM can be developed with an APM or a hybrid approach (i.e. using an Agile software development process to create an Agile end product).This paper covers possible methodologies based on traditional and Agile software development approaches. These encourage a flexible development approach to ECM implementation, and promoting end user involvement and their needs. An ECM system should be dynamic enough to meet the demands of future organisational growth and the business environment. It should allow integration with other new software, including those in the organisation and those in the Cloud. Two methodologies (Scrum and MIKE2.0) are explained, along with their strengths and weaknesses. The recommendation is to synthesize them so that future implementations may take advantage of techniques from both. MIKE2.0 can ensure good information governance, while Scrum can provide an innovative team-based approach and user empowerment, which are highly useful for implementing Content Services rapidly.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.241 · 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