We think you have liked this presentation. If you wish to download it, please recommend it to your friends in any social system. Share buttons are a little bit lower. Thank you!
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byAlayna Rise
Modified over 2 years ago
Laurie E Damianos, MITRE September 2008 Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited. MITRE Case # 08-1022 ©2008 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved.
©2008 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved, Social bookmarking – not the same as traditional browser bookmarking Bookmark resources, tag with keywords, add description & comments Share collections, explore topics, discover new communities, find experts Retrieve bookmarks by tag, user (or affiliation, filetype, description, …) Access from any browser, any device Netvouz FeedMeLinks igooi Blogmarks Blinklist del.icio.us CiteULike Simpy digg Furl Connotea Scuttle del.irio.us Jots HLOMunalog
Goal Assess utility of social bookmarking in a closed corporate environment Hypotheses Useful in sharing resources Support subject area social networks Feed expertise finding Enhance value of other info access capabilities ©2008 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved,
The MITRE Corporation Size ~6500 scientists, engineers, support specialists Type of work FFRDCs, independent technology research, application development & problem solving for sponsors near- term & future Expertise systems engineering, info technology, operational concepts, enterprise modernization Diversity 100s of projects, numerous domains Corporate appeal of social bookmarking Maps well to collaboration & info sharing goals Complements current info sharing techniques Listservs, wikis, weblogs, SharePoint sites, employee transfer folders Fills gap in ability to share both internal & external resources Increases number of access points to content Leverages “wisdom of crowds” Employees already using del.icio.us, Connotea, Furl, etc… ©2008 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved,
Corporately stewarded collections Tips Popular topics Bookmarked resources ©2008 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved,
User details at a glance Related users by tag, by bookmark Bookmarks users have in common Users by organizational affiliation Comment feature for collaborative discussions ©2008 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved,
Single sign on, LDAP, corporate phonebook Linkscan del.icio.us, other intranet prototypes Email, RSS ©2008 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved,
Search by string, tag, file type, user, organization… Pivot browsing by user & tag (and user’s tag) ©2008 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved,
99K tags 12.5K unique 19K bookmarks 17% internal bookmarks Supports need for internal social bookmarking service 83% external bookmarks We have no other way to share external resources Average information provider has 55 bookmarks tagged with 5.2 terms ©2008 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved,
Useful in sharing resources ©2008 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved, I use it to promote awareness of interesting articles for others and to publicize availability of new resources. Facilitates info discovery (of vetted resources) I’ve found and shared VERY GOOD info with my team who said, “Where did you find that?” Supports teams, subject area social networks, virtual communities Our project teams bookmark relevant resources with a project-specific tag and also use onomi to point to project deliverables located in Sharepoint and other web servers. When I look up bookmarks on a certain topic, it’s nice to see who else is interested in the same thing. Feeds expertise finding I was called by someone who had seen some of my bookmarks on visualization and was interested in learning more. Augments info access I needed specific domain information, and this is gave me better hits than enterprise search. Expands knowledge stewardship to others Bookmarking is so easy and fast. It is helping the librarians expand knowledge stewardship out to others.
Enterprise social software is emerging trend Different kinds of users (contributors, retrievers, browsers) & different levels of activity (hourly, daily, weekly, monthly) Typically, only 9-15% of populations are contributors in social communities A community benefits when just 15% of its members are tagging information (Caterina Fake, co-founder of Flickr) 90-9-1 rule: participation inequality of social network communities (Jakob Nielsen) 90% of users are lurkers (i.e., read or observe, but don't contribute) 9% of users contribute from time to time, but other priorities dominate their time 1% of users participate a lot and account for most contributions Compare to participation inequality of other Internet communities weblogs 95 – 5 – 0.1 Wikipedia 99.8 – 0.2 – 0.003 ©2008 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved,
Attracting, educating & sustaining users over time Benefits: yet another tool? Change in work practices Achieving critical mass Information lifecycle Consistency & completeness of tagging Folksonomy vs. taxonomy Recommendations ©2008 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved,
Moving to production environment Used to produce lightweight newsletters RSS feeds populate community sites Integrated with enterprise search Related research Recommender systems (users/experts, tags, resources) Social networking ©2008 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved,
A National Resource Working in the Public Interest © 2007 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved. Laurie Damianos KM TEM December 2007 onomi MITRE’s.
A National Resource Working in the Public Interest © 2007 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved. Approved for Public Release. Fostering Collaboration.
A National Resource Working in the Public Interest © 2006 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved. KM at MITRE Jean Tatalias KM TEM, December 2007.
© 2007 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved A National Resource Working in the Public Interest Approved for Public Release. Social Software at MITRE.
Web 2.0: The Library 2.0 in Your Future Stephen Abram, VP, Innovation May 17, 2006.
Thinking Ahead: News 2.0 Stephen Abram, VP, Innovation May 17, 2006.
Web 2.0 for Government Knowledge Management Everyone benefits by sharing knowledge March 24, 2010 Emerging Technologies Work Group Rich Zaziski, CEO FYI.
Social Information Processing March 26-28, 2008 AAAI Spring Symposium Stanford University
Web 2.0 Features on Scitation. Web 2.0 and Powder Diffraction Web 2.0 features can be found on the Scitation platform for Powder Diffraction –
® Executive Overview August 2007 Expertise within Reach.
Web 2.0: The Library 2.0 in Your Future Stephen Abram, VP, Innovation NHAIS May 10, 2006.
Overview Research Tools Turning Search into Research Darlene Fichter Data Library Services, U of S Library November 15, 2004.
© 2011 IBM Corporation Getting social in IBM. © 2011 IBM Corporation Are we having a conversation? Today, business happens in real-time. Market shifts.
Creating Collaborative Partnerships
INTRODUCTION TO THE STATE OF MICHIGAN’S SHAREPOINT ENVIRONMENT.
Web 2.0: Concepts and Applications 4 Organizing Information.
Social Bookmarking with del.icio.us. What is del.icio.us? Social Software Store your bookmarks online Tag your bookmarks Share your bookmarks with others.
Sharing Online Resources Social Bookmarking. Ambition in Action Facilitators Stephan Ridgway, Workforce Development.
NHS Online. NHS Resource Centre: background The website first launched in September 2006 to honour three key NHS EWA deliverables: Ensure wide distribution.
WEB 2.0 PATTERNS Carolina Marin. Content Introduction The Participation-Collaboration Pattern The Collaborative Tagging Pattern.
© 2017 SlidePlayer.com Inc. All rights reserved.