Talk:Knowledge management system
We need disambiguation
The majority of the links to this page refer to a specific software system called "KMS", which was a commercial product of Knowledge Systems, Inc., and has historical value, as indicated by the pages linking here.
The original converted content from the FOLDOC was appropriate for that system.
An article describing that system can be found at the ACM Digital Library: KMS: a distributed hypermedia system for managing knowledge in organizations
The general concept of a Knowledge Management System is worth explaining, but not at the cost of removing the historical reference of the system by the same name.
We need some examples
I guess we need some good examples about different systems to cover all areas of KMS, since KMS is quite an broad deffinition which many kind of softwares that have different practical approaches can be categorised into. Some examples: CAD (3DS Max, Autocad), Business Intelligence (Crystal Reports, Business Objects Enterprise), Document sharing systems (Docushare), Content Management Systems (Xaraya, Postnuke, Sharepoint) and even Office Systems (Microsoft Office). Any thoughts on this? --Pinnecco 20:06, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
- Just for referencing, I have Laudon's Management Information System here (Intl 8th edition) and it actually divides the System and Infrastructure for knowledge management as follows:
- Knowledge Work Systems
- Virtual reality
- Investment workstations
- Office Systems
- Word processing
- Desktop publishing
- Imaging and Web Publishing
- Electronic Calendars
- Group Collaboration Systems
- Artificial Intelligence Systems
- Expert systems
- Neural nets
- Fuzzy logic
- Generic algorithms
- Intelligent agents
--Pinnecco 20:06, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Merge with KM?
- I think you are right Jack. It has always been a weak set of assertions and no effort is being put in to its improvements (other than more assertions). What do other people think? Merging it would make a lot of sense. --Snowded 08:23, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I think it belongs in the ECMS entry. There doesn't seem to be much distinction between an ECMS and a KMS other than the assumption that a CMS usually includes all components while a KMS can have any combination of components. Doesn't that make it just a type of CMS? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 20:56, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Should a company be willing to accept a project that requires immediate organizational restructuring? if so what factors should it consider? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Javed Ali Khawaja (talk • contribs) 06:52, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Just for giving an other opinion: I, as a web developper, reached this page after a specific search for Knowledges Management **Systems**. My purpose was to find informations about a kind of softwares, not about the generic management of knowledges. So, in my very case, having this page independant is a really good thing :) Hope this could be helpfull (and apologizes for my english). --Fredb24 (talk) 14:20, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
I have in the absence of any objection formalised the merger proposal. I propose to take some of the text and references into the KM page either in existing sections or possibly a new section. Any objections? --Snowded (talk) 07:09, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
- Now that Knowledge management has been rewritten, do we merge this with KM, or delete it? Or do the parts that are software-specific (the taxonomy listed above in the talk), should they go with Knowledge management software ...? Harvey the rabbit (talk) 03:21, 12 November 2008 (UTC)