<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark S. Ackerman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Juri Dachtera</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Pipek, Volkmar</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Wulf, Volker</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sharing Knowledge and Expertise: The CSCW View of Knowledge Management</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) Journal</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">collective intelligence</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">cscw</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">expertise finding</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">expertise sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">information access</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">knowledge sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">QA</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2013</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">01/2013</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">22</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">531-573</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Knowledge Management (KM) is a diffuse and controversial term, which has been used by a large number of research disciplines. CSCW, over the last 20 years, has taken a critical stance towards most of these approaches, and instead, CSCW shifted the focus towards a practice-based perspective. This paper surveys CSCW researchers’ viewpoints on what has become called ‘knowledge sharing’ and ‘expertise sharing’. These are based in an understanding of the social contexts of knowledge work and practices, as well as in an emphasis on communication among knowledgeable humans. The paper provides a summary and overview of the two strands of knowledge and expertise sharing in CSCW, which, from an analytical standpoint, roughly represent ’generations’ of research: an ’object-centric’ and a ’people-centric’ view. We also survey the challenges and opportunities ahead.&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tao Dong</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Huh, Jina</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark W. Newman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark S. Ackerman</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Supporting Re-Use in DIY Software Projects: A Gray-Box Approach</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Workshop on Hacking, Tinkering, Crafts &amp; Inventive Leisure Practices, ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">collaborative help</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">configuration</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">hacking communities</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">knowledge sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">recommender systems</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Software customization</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2011</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">11/2011</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;DIYers who work with software often attempt to reuse others’ work wherever they can as they seek to assemble, modify, and extend their systems. In this paper, we briefly discuss the challenges faced by software DIYers in the process of reusing others’ software configurations through our study of the MythTV community. We also discuss the benefits of enabling users to engage with others’ configurations as “gray-boxes,” allowing them to pay attention to just the parts that must be opened up and modified and ignore the rest. We propose a new technical facility called Tailor Wear to give users guidance and hints about where and how to modify configuration artifacts by visually presenting the tailoring traces left by similar or selected peers.&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Lada A. Adamic</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Zhang, Jun</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bakshy, Eytan</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark S. Ackerman</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Knowledge Sharing and Yahoo Answers: Everyone Knows Something</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on World Wide Web</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">expertise finding</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">expertise sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">help seeking</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">knowledge sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">online communities</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Q&amp;A communities</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">QA communities</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">question answering</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">social network analysis</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2008</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Yahoo Answers (YA) is a large and diverse question-answer forum, acting not only as a medium for sharing technical knowledge, but as a place where one can seek advice, gather opinions, and satisfy one&#039;s curiosity about a countless number of things. In this paper, we seek to understand YA&#039;s knowledge sharing and activity. We analyze the forum categories and cluster them according to content characteristics and patterns of interaction among the users. While interactions in some categories resemble expertise sharing forums, others incorporate discussion, everyday advice, and support. With such a diversity of categories in which one can participate, we find that some users focus narrowly on specific topics, while others participate across categories. This not only allows us to map related categories, but to characterize the entropy of the users&#039; interests. We find that lower entropy correlates with receiving higher answer ratings, but only for categories where factual expertise is primarily sought after. We combine both user attributes and answer characteristics to predict, within a given category, whether a particular answer will be chosen as the best answer by the asker.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Wayne G Lutters</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark S. Ackerman</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Beyond Boundary Objects: Collaborative Reuse in Aircraft Technical Support</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Computer Supported Cooperative Work: The Journal of Collaborative Computing</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">boundary objects</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">collaborative work</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">expertise sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">high reliability organizations</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">hotlines</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">information reuse</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">knowledge sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">organizational memory</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">safety</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">service engineering</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">technical support</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2007</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">06/2007</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">16</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">341-372</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Boundary objects are a critical, but understudied, theoretical construct in CSCW. Through a field study of aircraft technical support, we examined the role of boundary objects in the practical achievement of safety by service engineers. Their resolution of repair requests was preserved in the organization’s memory via three compound boundary objects. These crystallizations did not manifest a static interpretation, but instead were continually reinterpreted in light of meta-negotiations. This suggests design implications for organizational memory systems which can more fluidly represent the meta-negotiations surrounding boundary objects.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">3</style></issue></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark S. Ackerman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Swenson, Anne</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Cotterill, Stephen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">DeMaagd, Kurtis</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">I-DIAG: from community discussion to knowledge distillation</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Communities and Technologies (C&amp;T 2003)</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">distillation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">expertise sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">forums</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">knowledge artifact</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">knowledge management</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">knowledge sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">online communities</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2003</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">06/2003</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">307–325</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;I-DIAG is an attempt to understand how to take the collective discussions of a large group of people and distill the messages and documents into more succinct, durable knowledge. I-DIAG is a distributed environment that includes two separate applications, CyberForum and Consolidate. The goals of the project, the architecture of IDIAG, and the two applications are described. We focus on technical mechanisms to augment social maintenance and social regulation in the system.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Lutters, Wayne G.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark S. Ackerman</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Achieving Safety: A Field Study of Boundary Objects in Aircraft Technical Support</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of the 2002 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW&#039;02)</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">boundary objects</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">collaborative work</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">expertise sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">high reliability organizations</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">hotlines</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">information reuse</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">knowledge sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">organizational memory</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">safety</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">service engineering</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">technical support</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2002</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">266–275</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Boundary objects are a critical, but understudied, theoretical construct in CSCW. Through a field study of aircraft technical support, we examined the role of boundary objects in the “achievement of safety” by service engineers. The resolution process of repair requests was captured in two compound boundary objects. These crystallizations did not manifest a static interpretation, but instead were continually reinterpreted in light of meta-negotiations. This suggests design implications for organizational memory systems which can more fluidly represent the meta-negotiations surrounding boundary objects.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark S. Ackerman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Christine A Halverson</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Considering an Organization&#039;s Memory</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of the 1998 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW&#039;98)</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">collective memory</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">computer-supported cooperative work</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">distributed cognition</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">expertise sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">group memory</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">information sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">knowledge management</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">knowledge sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">organizational memory</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1998</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">11/1998</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">39–48</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;The term organizational memory is due for an overhaul. Memory appears to be everywhere in organizations; yet, the term has been limited to a few uses. In this paper we examine what memory in an organization really is. Based on an ethnographic study of a telephone hotline group, this paper presents a micro-level analysis of a hotline call, the work activity surrounding the call, and the memory used in the work activity. We do this analysis from the viewpoint of distributed cognition theory, finding it fruitful for an understanding of an organization’s memory.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">McDonald, David W.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark S. Ackerman</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Just Talk to Me: A Field Study of Expertise Location</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of the 1998 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW&#039;98)</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">bug reporting</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">CMC</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">computer mediated communications</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">expert locators</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">expertise finding</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">expertise location</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">expertise networks</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">expertise sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">information seeking</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">knowledge networks</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">knowledge sharing</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1998</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">11/1998</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">315–324</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Everyday, people in organizations must solve their problems to get their work accomplished. To do so, they often must find others with knowledge and information. Systems that assist users with finding such expertise are increasingly interesting to organizations and scientific communities. But, as we begin to design and construct such systems, it is important to determine what we are attempting to augment. Accordingly, we conducted a five-month field study of a medium-sized software firm. We found the participants use complex, iterative behaviors to minimize the number of possible expertise sources, while at the same time, provide a high possibility of garnering the necessary expertise. We briefly consider the design implications of the identification, selection, and escalation behaviors found during our field study.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark S. Ackerman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">McDonald, David W.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Answer Garden 2: Merging Organizational Memory with Collaborative Help</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of the 1996 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW&#039;96)</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">CMC</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">collaborative help</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">community memory</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">computer-mediated communications</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">corporate memory</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">expertise sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">group memory</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">help</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">information access</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">information refining</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">information retrieval</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">information systems</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">knowledge sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">organizational memory</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1996</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">11/1996</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">97–105</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;This research examines a collaborative solution to a common problem, that of providing help to distributed users. The Answer Garden 2 system provides a secondgeneration architecture for organizational and community memory applications. After describing the need for Answer Garden 2’s functionality, we describe the architecture of the system and two underlying systems, the Cafe ConstructionKit and Collaborative Refinery. We also present detailed descriptions of the collaborative help and collaborative refining facilities in the Answer Garden 2 system&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark S. Ackerman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Palen, Leysia</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The Zephyr Help Instance: Promoting Ongoing Activity in a CSCW System</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI&quot;96)</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">CMC</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">collaborative help</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">collective help</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">computer-mediated communications</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">e-communities</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">electronic social spaces</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">expertise sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">help</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">knowledge sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">media spaces</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">norms</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">organizational interfaces</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">social maintenance</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1996</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">268–275</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;If Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) systems are to be successful over time, it will be necessary to promote ongoing and continuing activity, not just initial adoption. In this paper, we consider what technical and social affordances are required to encourage the continued use of a CSCW system. To explore these issues, we examine a chat-like system, the Zephyr Help Instance, which is used extensively at MIT. The Help Instance facilitates users asking questions of one another, and is an example of a distributed help and problem-solving system. We provide an overview of the system’s use as well as those mechanisms, both technical and social, that facilitate continuing its use over time.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark S. Ackerman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mandel, Eric</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Memory in the small: An application to provide task-based organizational memory for a scientific community</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS&#039;95)</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">collaborative memory</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">collective memory</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">group memory</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">knowledge sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">organizational memory</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">scientific communities</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1995</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">323–332</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Many forms of organizational memory must exist embedded within the organizational processes and tasks. This paper argues that &quot;memory-in-the small,&quot; memory utilized in the performance of an organizational task, can serve as an effective performance support mechanism. By basing organizational memory upon organizational tasks (and basing task support upon organizational memory), organizational memory systems can provide additional and necessary support services for organizations and communities. As an example of memory-in-the-small, this paper describes a software application, called the ASSIST, that combines organizational memory with task performance for a scientific community. The ASSIST utilizes and stores the collective memory of astrophysicists about data analysis, and is used world-wide by astrophysicists. The paper also considers the theoretical and architectural issues involved when combining organizational memory with task performance.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark S. Ackerman</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Augmenting the Organizational Memory: A Field Study of Answer Garden</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of the 1994 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW&#039;94)</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">collaborative help</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">collective help</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">corporate memory</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">expertise sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">group memory</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">information access</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">information retrieval</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">information systems</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">knowledge sharing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">organizational memory</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1994</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">11/1994</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Complete</style></url></web-urls></urls><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">243–252</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;A growing concern for organizations and groups has been to augment their knowledge and expertise. One such augmentation is to provide an organizational memory, some record of the organization&#039;s knowledge. However, relatively little is known about how computer systems might enhance organizational, group, or community memory. This paper presents findings from a field study of one such organizational memory system, the Answer Garden. The paper discusses the usage data and qualitative evaluations from the field study, and then draws a set of lessons for next-generation organizational memory systems.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record></records></xml>