[agents] CFP :: Special Issue on the Design, Development and Use of Knowledge Artifacts in professional communities of practice on the Program Journal (Emerald)

[Vizzari Giuseppe]

(Apologies for cross-posting)

CFP – Special Issue on the Design, Development and Use of Knowledge Artifacts in
professional communities of practice (on "Program").

Broadly meant, a Knowledge Artifact (KA) is any artifact purposely built to
support knowledge-related processes. With this term, therefore, a concrete 
tool, either material or software, is denoted, as long as users can interact with it 
on a physical level to various aims: to archive and get access to knowledge
sources; co-create knowledge with peers and colleagues; ratify and disseminate
it; share and exchange best practices and solutions; and last but not least, learn
(knowledge internalization). For this reason, KAs come in very different formats
and types: just to limit ourselves to the electronic KAs, i.e., what we denote as
Knowledge IT artifacts (to hint at those specific IT artifacts, i.e., applications and
software platforms, that specifically support knowledge creation and sharing),
examples include:

- decision support systems that convey the most pertinent items according to 
  the situation or the user requests, profiles and needs;
- on-line digital platforms enabling an aggregation of firms (a cluster, a
  supply chain) to share valuable knowledge in order to achieve specific 
  strategic aims (such as internationalization, new product development, lean
  production);
- online wiki encyclopedias and manuals that represent objectively, if not
  structuredly (e.g., ontologically) a body of specialist knowledge;
- multimedia learning software that integrate different content sources and
  interactive techniques to have users develop both intellectual and practical
  competencies on the basis of the knowledge embedded in the artifacts;
- amateur blogs and fora where novices can ask experts for advices or where
  enthusiasts may share tutorials on how to do things by oneself.

This heterogeneity of artifacts reflects both the heterogeneity of the
application domains where knowledge must be computationally supported (R&D
departments in organizations, Teaching Institutions, Communities of Practice 
and Communities of Knowledge) but also widely different design approaches and
perspectives in regard to what knowledge is, how to tap in it, how it 
circulates in human communities, and which enterprise business models favour
extracting value from it.

In a recent literature survey (Cabitza and Locoro, 2014), best paper of the 
KMIS 2014 conference, an extensive review of the heterogeneous body of 
scholarly contributions that focus on the concept of KA has allowed to draw a 
first interpretative and bottom-up framework to pinpoint the main KA design 
poles: objectivity and situativity, seen as dimensions which can be present at
different degrees in each KITA: from the most model-based and AI driven ones,
where the effort of knowledge representation and formalization by the designers
is critical for the success of the final application; to those applications 
that clearly adopt a more constructivist, pragmatic and collaboration-oriented
approach to knowledge support (including enterprise social media, and 
wiki-based communities of peer experts). Obviously, other design-oriented 
dimensions can be considered like interactivity, formality, tangibility. In 
particular, the latter dimension allows to distinguish between software 
applications and material, tangible objects that, nevertheless, enable 
knowledge-sharing practices that could not be possible without their mediating 
role.

This call grounds on and extends two successful editions of the “International
Workshops on the Design, Development and use of Knowledge IT Artifacts in
professional communities of practice” (KITA) that were held in 2015 and 2016 as
co-located events of IC3K, the International Joint Conference on Knowledge
Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management in Lisbon and Porto
(Portugal) respectively. However, this call is open and aimed at collecting 
more contributions from scholars that look at the phenomenon of the Knowledge
Artifact from different and complementary perspectives that are typical of
intersecting disciplines like CSCW, CSCL, IR, KR, HCI, AI, KM and IS.
Consequently, the topics of interest are the following ones:

- Knowledge Artifacts Design and evaluation 
- Relationship btw Knowledge Management Technologies and IT Artifacts 
- Relationship btw Knowledge Management and Collaborative-oriented 
  Technologies
- Socio-Technical System Theory and Design
- Models, Theories and Methodologies of Knowledge, Collaboration and
  Learning
- Knowledge and Data Visualization
- Knowledge Artifacts and Collaboration at the firm level in clusters and
  supply chains
- Learning Technologies
- Business models enabled by Knowledge Artifacts
- Pragmatic Web 
- Semiotic Engineering
- Digital fabrication
- DIY culture in the making economy
- Uncertainty representation and management in Knowledge Artifacts
- Knowledge artifacts and Big Data
- Human-Data Interaction

In particular, we are looking for contributions that could report on 
experiences of either design of a KA, or of its use in the field. The most
appreciated efforts of the contribution would lie in describing the main 
assumptions related to the nature of the knowledge that the KA at hand are 
intended to manage or support; in characterizing the main objectives and goals 
that motivate the KA designers and users; and in extracting both the 
implications for design and lessons learnt from experience with KA that could
fit the interest of a multi-disciplinary community of scholars that we aim to 
coalesce with this special issue.

In the hope of the guest editors, this special issue will collect the
foundations to develop a common ground and language by which the "Knowledge
Artifact" construct can become useful both to inform the design and to evaluate
the impact of knowledge-oriented technologies in the communities of practice
that adopt them and adapt them to their ever-evolving bodies of knowledge.

***************************************************
Important dates

- Paper submission: February 9, 2017
- Author Notification: April 19, 2017
- Camera-ready due: June 1st, 2017
- Special issue publication: August-September 2017

*************************************************** 
Review Process and Submission

• All manuscripts will be double-blind reviewed.
• Manuscripts should follow the style guidelines of the Program Journal
• Manuscripts are submitted with the understanding that they are original,    
  unpublished works and are not being submitted elsewhere
• Manuscripts should be submitted by February 9th 2017
• Please indicate clearly that your submission is for the
  special issue on “Management of conflicts”
• Paper details: For each submission, three files are required:
  o First file: manuscript title and names, institutional affiliation, contact 
    information for each of the authors, manuscript title and brief (100 word 
    maximum) biography of each of the authors.
  o Second file: manuscript title and brief (250-300 words) abstract of the
    paper.
  o Third file: manuscript title followed by the text of paper.
• The paper should be count between 5000 and 10000 words in length, longer    
  papers could be considered if justified.

For any queries and to submit your proposition, contact one of the editors:
Federico Cabitza: cabitza at disco.unimib.it  Angela Locoro:
angela.locoro at disco.unimib.it Aurelio Ravarini: aravarini at liuc.it

Author Guidelines Full papers should be from 5000 to 1000 words, included
references, tables, graphs, images and appendices. Guidelines and templates
available in the Emerald Web site
(http://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/authors/index.htm). All accepted papers
will be published in the special issue of the Emerald Program Journal 
(available at http://emeraldgrouppublishing.com/products/journals/call_for_papers.htm?id=6989) and will be submitted for indexation by Thomson Reuters Citation Index (ISI), DBLP and Scopus.



References:

Alavi, M., and Leidner, D.E., 2001. Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues. MIS Quarterly, Vol. 25, pp. 107-136.

Boland, R., Lyytinen, K., & Yoo, Y. (2003). Path Creation with Digital 3D Representations: Networks of Innovation in Architectural Design and Construction. DIGIT 2003 Proceedings, 1.

Brown, J.S. & Duguid, P. (2001). Knowledge and Organization: A Social-Practice Perspective. Organization Science, 12(2), 198-213.

Burke, P. (2013). Social History of Knowledge. John Wiley & Sons

Cabitza, F., & Locoro, A. (2014). "Made with knowledge": Disentangling the IT Knowledge Artifact by a qualitative literature review. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing, KMIS 2014; Rome; Italy; October 2014, pp. 64-75. INSTICC Press.

Cabitza, F., Cerroni, A., Locoro, A., Simone, C. (2014). The Knowledge-Stream Model - A comprehensive model for knowledge circulation in communities of knowledgeable practitioners. KMIS 2014.

Cabitza, F., (2013). At the boundary of communities and roles: boundary objects and knowledge artifacts as complementary resources for the design of information systems. From Information to Smart Society: Environment, Politics and Economics. LNISO. Springer, Berlin.

Cabitza, F., Colombo, G., & Simone, C. (2013). Leveraging underspecification in knowledge artifacts to foster collaborative activities in professional communities. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 71(1), 24-45.

Cheatle, A., & Jackson, S. J. (2015, February). Digital Entanglements: Craft, Computation and Collaboration in Fine Art Furniture Production. Procs of CSCW (pp. 958-968). ACM.

Cook, S.D., Brown, J.S.(1999). Bridging epistemologies: The generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing. Organ. Sci. 10, 4, 381-400.

Davenport, T.H., Prusak, L., (1998). Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. Harvard Business Press.

De Roeck, et al. (2012). I would DiYSE for it!: a manifesto for do-it-yourself internet-of-things creation. In Procs of NordCHI, (pp. 170-179). ACM.

Erdem, S. A. (2013). Moving from intermediaries to apomediaries: A study of the ongoing changes in marketing channels. The Review of Business Information Systems (Online), 17(1), 37.

Eysenbach, G. (2007). From intermediation to disintermediation and apomediation: new models for consumers to access and assess the credibility of health information in the age of Web2. 0. Studies in health technology and informatics, 129(1), 162.

Fogli D., Guida G., (2013). Knowledge-Centered Design of Decision Support Systems for Emergency Management,  Decision Support Systems, 55, pp. 336-347, 2013.

Fogli, D., Cabitza, F. & Piccinno, A. (2014). “Each to His Own”: Distinguishing Activities, Roles and Artifacts in EUD Practices. In Smart Organizations and Smart Artifacts (pp. 193-205). Springer International Publishing.

Greenhalgh, T., Wieringa, S. (2011). Is it time to drop the “knowledge transla-tion”metaphor? A critical literature review. J. R. Soc. Med. 104, 12, 501-509.

Grover V. and Kohli, R. (2012). Cocreating IT value: new capabilities and metrics for multifirm environments. MIS Q. 36, 1 (March 2012), 225-232.

Hielscher S. & Smith A. (2014). "Community-based digital fabrication workshops: A review of the research literature," SPRU Working Paper Series 2014-08, SPRU - Science and Technology Policy Research, University of Sussex.

Knobel, M., & Lankshear, C. (2010). DIY media: creating, sharing and learning with new technologies (Vol. 44). Peter Lang.

Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: how the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

Knorr-Cetina, K. (2001). Objectual Practice. In T. R. Schatzki, K. Knorr Cetina, & E. von Savigny (eds.). The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory (pp. 175-188). London and NY: Routledge.

Kuznetsov, S., & Paulos, E. (2010, October). Rise of the expert amateur: DIY projects, communities, and cultures. In Procs of NordCHI (pp. 295-304). ACM.

Lande, M. (2013). "Defining makers making: Emergent practice and emergent meanings." age 23(1).

Lindtner, S., Hertz, G. D., & Dourish, P. (2014, April). Emerging sites of HCI innovation: hackerspaces, hardware startups & incubators. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 439-448). ACM.

Lyytinen, K., & Damsgaard, J. (2011). Inter-organizational information systems adoption - a configuration analysis approach. European Journal Of Information Systems Eur J Inf Syst, 20(5), 496-509.

Mørch, A.I., Nygård, K.A. and Ludvigsen, S.R. (2009). Adaptation and Generalisation in Software Product Development. In H. Daniels et al. (Eds.), Activity theory in practice: Promoting learning across boundaries (pp. 184-205). London, UK: Taylor & Francis Books.

Mota, C. (2011, November). The rise of personal fabrication. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM conference on Creativity and cognition (pp. 279-288). ACM.

Nygård, K.A. And Mørch, A.I. (2007). The Role of Boundary Crossing for Knowledge Advancement in Product Development. Proceedings of the Int'l Conference on Computers in Education (ICCE 2007), in T. Hirashima et al. (Eds.) Supporting Learning Flow Through Integrative Technologies, IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp. 183-186.

Orlikowski, W. J. (2006). Material Knowing: The Scaffolding of Human Knowledgeability. European Journal of Information Systems, 15(5), 460-466.

Orlikowski, W.J., Iacono, C.S. (2001). Desperately seeking the “IT” in IT research-A call to theorizing the IT artifact. Inf. Syst. Res. 12, 2, 121-134.

Paavola, S., Engeström, R., & Hakkarainen, K. (2012). The trialogical approach as a new form of mediation. In Collaborative knowledge creation (pp. 1-14). SensePublishers.

Ratto, M., & Ree, R. (2012). Materializing information: 3D printing and social change. First Monday, 17(7).

Salazar-Torres, G., Colombo, E., Da Silva, F. S. C., Noriega, C. A., & Bandini, S. (2008). Design issues for knowledge artifacts. Knowledge-Based Systems, 21(8), 856-867.

Sartori, F., & Melen, R. (2015). Time Evolving Expert Systems Design and Implementation: The KAFKA Approach. KEOD 2015: 84-95

Sowa, J.F. (1999). Knowledge representation: logical, philosophical, and computational foundations.

Stahl, G., Ludvigsen, S., Law, N., & Cress, U. (2014). CSCL artifacts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 9(3), 237-245.

Tanenbaum, J. G., Williams, A. M., Desjardins, A., & Tanenbaum, K. (2013, April). Democratizing technology: pleasure, utility and expressiveness in DIY and maker practice. In Procs of SIGCHI (pp. 2603-2612). ACM.

Verbeek, P.P., (2005). Artifacts and Attachment: A Post-Script Philosophy of Mediation. In: Inside the Politics of Technology : Agency and Normativity in the Co-Production of Technology and Society. Amsterdam University Press, pp. 125-146.

Williams, A., Gibb, A., & Weekly, D. (2012). Research with a hacker ethos: what DIY means for tangible interaction research. interactions, 19(2), 14-19.