20 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2021
    1. Structures created by infrastructures can be less visible in today’s information society

      And some knowledge infrastructures (like hypothesis) can be entirely invisible for the majority of people, unless they have installed a specific tool to see the infrastructure.

  2. Sep 2021
    1. We need more SCOSS-like experimentation. We need initiatives with short iterations of conceptualization and execution, a sort of trial-and-error mentality as we navigate this complex issue. We need research organisations and libraries to create budget lines for open infrastructures. We need funders to start supporting the maintenance of open infrastructures like the eLife Innovation Initiative or the Chan Zuckerberg Foundation.

    1. Knowledge Futures Group is a 501c3 nonprofit building open source technology and collaborating with communities of practice to design and build the public digital infrastructure needed for effective, equitable, and sustainable knowledge futures.
  3. Aug 2021
  4. Sep 2020
  5. Jun 2020
  6. Jul 2019
  7. Jun 2019
  8. May 2019
  9. Apr 2019
    1. A Vision for Scholarly Communication Currently, there is a strong push to address the apparent deficits of the scholarly communication system. Open Science has the potential to change the production and dissemination of scholarly knowledge for the better, but there is no commonly shared vision that describes the system that we want to create.

      A Vision for Scholarly Communication

    1. Seized with the desire to improve the visibility of Canadian music in the world, a ragtag band of librarians led by Stacy Allison-Cassin set out to host Wikipedia edit-a-thons in the style of Art+Feminism, but with a focus on addressing Canadian music instead. Along the way, they recognized that Wikidata offered a low-barrier, high-result method of making that data not only visible but reusable as linked open data, and consequently incorporated Wikidata into their edit-a-thons. This is their story.

  10. Jan 2019
    1. As fluctuations in resource endowments arise overtime because of the fluidity in the OC, these fluctua-tions in resources create fluctuations in tensions, makingsimple structural tactics for managing tensions such ascross-functional teams or divergent opinions (Sheremata2000) inadequate for fostering knowledge collaboration.As complex as these tension fluctuations are for the com-munity, it is precisely these tensions that provide thecatalyst for knowledge collaboration. Communities thatthen respond to these tensions generatively (rather thanin restrictive ways) will be able to realize this potential.Thus, it is not the simple presence of resources that fos-ter knowledge collaboration, but rather the presence ofongoing dynamic tensions within the OC that spur thecollaboration. We describe these tensions in the follow-ing section

      Tension as a catalyst for knowledge work/collaboration

    2. Fluidity recognizes the highly flexible or permeableboundaries of OCs, where it is hard to figure out whois in the community and who is outside (Preece et al.2004) at any point in time, let alone over time. Theyare adaptive in that they change as the attention, actions,and interests of the collective of participants change overtime. Many individuals in an OC are at various stagesof exit and entry that change fluidly over time.

      Evokes boundary objects and boundary infrastructures.

    1. In knowledge work, several related factors sug-gest the need to reconceptualize coordination.

      Complex knowledge work coordination demands attention to how coordination is managed, as well as what (content) and when (temporality).

      "This distinction becomes increasingly important in complex knowledge work where there is less reliance on formal structure, interdependence is changing, and work is primarily performed in teams."

      Traditional theories of coordination are not entirely relevant to fast-response teams who are more flexible, less formally configured and use more improvised decision making mechanisms.

      These more flexible groups also are more multi-disciplinary communities of practice with different epistemic standards, work practices, and contexts.

      "Thus, because of differences in perspectives and interests, it becomes necessary to provide support for cross-boundary knowledge transformation (Carlile 2002)."

      Evokes boundary objects/boundary infrastructure issues.