See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/228884761

How to capitalize knowledge with the MASK method

Article · January 2001

CITATIONS READS

7 1,940

4 authors, including:

Matta Nada Jean-Louis Ermine

Université de Technologie de Troyes Institut Mines-Télécom
178 PUBLICATIONS   697 CITATIONS    128 PUBLICATIONS   540 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

BIOMIST - BIO Medical research Imaging SemanTic data management View project

Learning from rare and complex experiences: the role of knowledge codification (PhD Project). View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Jean-Louis Ermine on 19 May 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 How to capitalize knowledge with the MASK method ?

Nada Matta1, Jean Louis Ermine1, Gérard Aubertin2, Jean-Yves Trivin2

1
Tech-CICO, Université de Technologie de Troyes
12 rue Marie Curie, BP. 2060, 10010 Troyes Cedex, France
e-mail: {Nada.Matta, Jean-Louis.Ermine}@utt.fr
2
INRS, Institut National de recherche et de sécurité
Avenue de Bourgogne, BP. 27 , 54501 Vandoeuvre Cedex, France
{Gerard.aubertin, Jean-yves.trivin}@inrs.fr

ABSTRACT
Knowledge Management is a global process in the enterprise. It includes all the processes that allow
capitalization, sharing and evolution of the Knowledge Capital of the firm, now recognized as a critical
resource of the organization. The strategic objective of Knowledge Management is to understand, support,
optimise and accelerate those processes, in coherence and cross-fertilization. Knowledge engineering
techniques are often used to capitalize knowledge. These techniques must be adapted and evolved
considering the main objectives of knowledge management: building and use organizational memory. We
study, in this paper, how the knowledge engineering method MASK (Method for Analysing and Structuring
Knowledge) considers this evolution.
Keywords

knowledge capitalization, knowledge engineering, MASK, knowledge sharing, modelling

1 Introduction

Following the micro and macro economic evolution, the vision of the firm has drastically changed. The only
useful vision was built on the production tool and the work force in the Taylor’s sense. Now, important
levers has appeared outside this vision : Customer Relationship, Information System, Business Intelligence,
Quality, new strategic activities (sales, marketing …). The firm is constantly changing to answer the new
challenge of its competitive environment. Knowledge Management is a attempt to link the classical
productive vision to these new needs. KM tries to put together, in coherent processes, the critical Knowledge
which is an essential resource for the production of goods or services and the Knowledge issued from the
competitive environment which is more and more important. That coherence is organised through the
Knowledge Capital of the firm, where all the processes contribute, and cooperate. Those processes are
organised according to the “Daisy Model” shown in Figure 1.

1
 Figure 1 . The key processes of KM

Those processes are internal (endogenous) as the “Capitalisation and Sharing Process” and the
“Learning and Capitalisation Process”. There are also external (exogenous), as Business Intelligence or
Scientific or Technological Scanning which bring new Knowledge from outside, or as the Customer
Relationship, or Marketing which are filters for the exponential capacity of invention and knowledge
evolution within the firm.

Knowledge Management is the management of those processes, including their relationship with the
Knowledge Capital of the firm. They can be described in four classes, corresponding to “petals” of the daisy
and one also to the “heart” of that model.

1) The Knowledge Capitalisation and Sharing Process. It performs a “Knowledge Cycle” assuring the
sharing (“recycling”) of Knowledge within the company.

2) The Interaction Process, with the competitive environment. A system can’t be isolated, and the
Knowledge Capital is constantly fed by information from outside. The Interaction Process is the one
who transforms information from outside into Knowledge useful for the company.

3) The Learning and Creation Process. This is a in the firm. It includes the problems of Learning
Organisation and Creativity.

4) The Selection Process. This is an evolutionist process of selection of new ideas, new knowledge created
inside the company with the help of market criteria, acceptability criteria etc. It includes the problems of
marketing, customer relationship, with a strong relationship with the critical knowledge of the firm,
especially the productive knowledge.

5) To those four processes, we can add a fifth, which is the Evaluation Process for evaluating the
Knowledge Capital, in a qualitative or quantitative way. Methods are now designed to evaluate the
Immaterial, Intellectual, or Knowledge Capital. This is still in construction.

2
In this paper, we focus on the Capitalisation and Sharing Process.

2 The Capitalisation and Sharing Process

To model that process, we refer to the well-known Nonaka and Takeuchi theory [Nonaka, 1995]. This
theory consider two kinds of knowledge : Tacit Knowledge and Explicit Knowledge.

Revisiting the theory, we can easily describe the Capitalisation and Sharing Process, also called the
“Knowledge Cycle”, as shown in Figure 2.

I n d ire ct T ra n sf e r

S h a rin g
E x p licit E x p licit
K n o w le d g e K n o w le d g e

E x p licita tion A p propria tion

(allow s d issem in ation ) (allow s efficien cy
gain s)

S ocia lisa tion

D ire ct T ra n sf e r
T a cit T a cit
K n o w le d g e K n o w le d g e

Figure 2 . The Knowledge Capitalisation and Transfer Process

The direct transfer (socialisation) is a Knowledge Sharing Process without elicitation. An indirect transfer is
an alternative way for Knowledge Sharing. The first sub-process is Knowledge Elicitation (or Explicitation
or Acquisition). In the next sub-process, the Knowledge is shared. It is clear that Knowledge Elicitation is
worthwhile only if the involved knowledge is shared among the concerned people within the organisation.
The new information technologies (especially intranet) provide powerful tools for sharing knowledge, but it
is not a sufficient condition : knowledge sharing is not obvious (Knowledge is power !), and leading change
must be specifically designed for that purpose. The third sub-process is Knowledge Appropriation, where
shared knowledge is used in operational way, in the working context, to perform complex tasks and/or solve
problems. Experimentation, training are classical levers for that sub-process.

There are two types of techniques that help to make knowledge explicit (Error! Reference source not
found.) :
1) Direct knowledge extraction, in which knowledge are extracted directly and dynamically from
organization activity. DataMining, Textmining, tracability are some of these techniques.

2) Knowledge capitalization, with which knowledge can be extracted by interviewing experts and from
documents and modelled. Knowledge engineering methods are mainly used in this aim.

3
In this paper, knowledge capitalization approach are studied, especially the MASK Method (Method for
Analysing and Structuring Knowledge). This method is used in many companies in France since 1996
[Ermine, 2000]. MASK delivers a final product called a “Knowledge Book”.

Figure 3 . Two techniques to make knowledge explicit

3 Knowledge capitalization success keys

There is a number of knowledge capitalization methods [Dieng et al, 2000] inherited from knowledge
engineering. These methods recommend knowledge modelling and provide methodologies (interviews,
document analysis, modelling formalisms, etc.) to do that. Knowledge engineering approaches have been
defined in the past, to develop knowledge based systems. For that, they recommend a systematic analysis in
order to capture a model close as more as possible to the reality. The methodologies they recommend have
been heavy in cost and time.

The objectives of knowledge capitalization is different. It aims at building organizational memories that
represents several views on an expertise or activity. Knowledge must be capitalized in an easy way. So, a
number of success keys corresponding on different phases of knowledge capitalization can be defined
[Matta et al, 2001] :

Knowledge extraction and formalization : Knowledge extraction and formalization must be done
interactively with experts. Knowledge engineering and experts have to build together models. As
consequence of this co-building: 1- knowledge engineering do not spend a lot of time in interviewing
experts, analysing and modelling ; 2- modelling formalism will be adapted and experts recognize easier
models built and knowledge represented ; 3- experts consider models as a mirror of their knowledge that
help them to abstract and formalize their reasoning in order to enrich models.

Knowledge sharing : The big difference between a knowledge based system and an organization
memory is that knowledge represented in this last one, must be shared by other organization actors. The
main objectives of organization memory building is to keep track of problem solving experience and share it
with others. So, the presentation form of knowledge memorized must take into account the internal
representation of information and data in an organization. The knowledge engineering vocabulary as task,
method, concept, etc. must be replaced by the specific activity formalism. In another hand, knowledge
represented in models have to be shared and recognized unless by the experts teams. Meetings must be
organized in order to discuss about a consensual knowledge representation.

Knowledge reuse and appropriation: As noted above, knowledge is memorized in order to help in
problem solving. So, the memory must offer an easy access to knowledge. For that, ergonomic procedures
(several views, adapted and flexible presentations, etc.) must be used in order to facilitate this access. Note
also, that communication technology can be used to integrate memory (or part of it) in actor workspace. The

4
acceptability of the memory is an essential key of reuse. So, it is important to proceed by a number of
training about its content and evaluate its reuse.

Memory evolution : As a natural memory, an organization memory will evolve and knowledge
capitalization process will be done continuously. Note also, that the structure of the memory will change as
same as its content. So, memory must be built in a flexible way expecting changes and evolution.

The next section presents how the MASK method can satisfy these success keys.

4 MASK a method for knowledge capitalization

MASK (Method of Analysis and Structuring Knowledge) is an evolution of the MKSM method. So, it is
based on the same principles as MKSM [Ermine, 1996], [Barthelmé, 1998] and [Ermine, 2000]. The MASK
method offers a flexible environment that allows to success knowledge capitalization projects. It have been
applied in a large number of domains (safety, business process, mechanical design, …) that have allowed its
evolution.

4.1 Knowledge extraction and formalization with Mask

Model representation in Mask is inherited from knowledge engineering studies. So, it reflects a cognitive
analysis of reasoning. Thus, it can be easy understood by an expert who recognises a representation of its
knowledge with models. Knowledge extraction and formalization can be so, done interactively with the
expert. In fact, MASK recommends model co-building. Knowledge engineering presents a model and
invites the expert(s) to fill it in. Expert(s) can suggest to modify some elements of the model and so on. For
instance, when applying MASK to capitalize knowledge about woodworking machines safety, models have
been titled by their content and not as activity model, task model and domain model. The expertise
memorized have been presented as analysis of an incident, recommendation, danger phenomena, etc. Some
elements also have been omitted in models as for example, the flux from danger phenomena models, etc.
Knowledge capitalizing as recommended in MASK (with different point of views) guides expert to focus on
a part of his world in order to describe it by emphasizing its main characteristics. Otherwise, it also help him
to have a global view of his expertise and problem solving experience. So, models can be considered as a
mirror that push expert to enrich and complete models.

In another hand, there is no successive order of model building recommended in MASK. Each application
domain have its formalization method. For example, in the woodworking machines safety application,
knowledge engineering and expert start knowledge formalization by listing danger phenomena and
modelling them. In another application which concerns business process services, activity models have been
defined at first.

4.2 Modelling tools

Modelling tools as defined in MASK, are generic enough and respond to expert's workspace and cognitive
vision. These tools have an important role in knowledge extraction and formalization. They help to structure
knowledge under : systemic, ergo-cognitive, psycho-cognitive, historical and evolution analysis. Examples
presented in the following are extracted from an experience of knowledge management in Woodworking
machines safety. This experience have been done in the National Institute of Safety Research (INRS).

5
4.2.1 The systemic analysis
The hypothesis on which the question "What is the knowledge about ?" relies upon is that the domain is
described by a set of processes that take place into it (the system is "covered by processes"). Then, we have
to produce a definition and description model of the different processes. The general system theory [Le
Moigne, 1977], guiding MASK, sets two fundamental dualities. The first one is the flow/field duality. Every
process produces its own flow that characterises it whatever the flow type is : material, energy, information
or more generally cognitive, prescriptive or whatsoever. The notion of flow has to be kept together with the
notion of field as it is in physics, where the field is seen as a "capacity of influence". That is, it represents all
the elements that influence the process but do not belong to it (e.g. a catalyst in a chemical reaction, the
wind and rain onto a fire). To sum up, we can say the flow takes place in the active process when the field
takes place in the active environment.

W o rk A cciden ts

In flu e n c e s
E n v iro n e m en t

S e ttin g O ff e ve n e m e n t : C o n s e q u e n c e:
- R e p la ce a cu tting to ol a n d th e m a ch in e is still - M o d ific atio n d u rin g th e u s e - D isa ble m e n t
m o vin g. - S p e c ific atio n o f a s p a c e b e tw e e n th e to o l - D e a th
- N o n co n trole d g e stu re
a n d th e o p e ra to r

S o u rc e T a rg e t
A p a rt o f th e b o d y
O p e ra to r
g e ttin g in to u ch th e cu t O p e ra to r
to o l. + Tool F lu x :
C in e tic e n e rg ie

C u tting o f th e b o d y p a rt
C o n ta ct w ith th e to
mol
o vin
ing mtoool
vin g
W hich to u ch e d th e to o l

Figure 4 . MASK a woodworking machines danger Phenomena model

The second duality in the MASK process modelling is the source/target duality. The flow, in a process,
links two subsystems. We call them : source and target. They both characterise the process as the flow and
the field already did.

The processes may be linked together to form a scenario. Processes can be enhanced with an analytical form
written by an expert where he puts all scientific elements (mathematical equations, range of data, threshold,
chemical reactions...) that may help understanding the process. The scenarios and their set of processes with
their analytical forms make the MASK phenomena model complete (Figure 4.).

6
 W o od wmoark
chining es
m a ch in es

G en eral kno w ledge

- W oo dw
d morkin
aching es
m achin
an desth eir
an duse
th eir us e
- D a ng er ph en om e n a G en eral kno w ledge
R e sourc e s W oo
oo ddwmorkin
K now -how -W aching es
m achin
an des an duse
th eir th eir us e
R e sourc e s -R e glem e ntatio ns
- S ynth etic cap acity - D a ng er ph en om e n a
-R e glem e ntatio ns -D
doc
ocum
umeents
nts
- A nalysis ex perie nce K now -how
-D
doc
ocum
umeents
nts - m achin e use exp erie nce
B eh a viour kno w le dge
- Test M ea ns B eh a viour kno w le dge
- H um ility in accid en t in form atio n asking
- E xplan atio n a nd sug ges tion

J u rid ico -te c h n ica l

A ccident Inform ation a n a lysis

A nalysis repo rt
A nalysis specialists

T e c h n ica l
Ju rid ico-tech n ical re c o m m a n d a tio n
task
S ynthetic repo rt
A nalysis specialists

L e tte r, d o cu m e n t, e tc.

Figure 5 . MASK : an incident analysis for woodworking machines safety

The third stage of MASK is a system activity analysis. It takes into account the system that produces or
consumes the knowledge. This model tries to link the domain knowledge with the operational situation of
the system. This analysis is a top-down functional analysis where each activity can be hierarchically
decomposed into some lower levels sub-activities. It is a data driven analysis; in a sense it is a simple
structured description of the activities (of the system "functions") linked together by flows (usually data
flows) they exchange. The language is close to the wildly spread SADT [IGL, 1982]. Then we will not detail
it here. An example is given in Error! Reference source not found.

4.2.2 The ergo-cognitive analysis

The task model (Error! Reference source not found.) describes the "dynamic" knowledge and shows an
ergo-cognitive analysis of an expertise. It is a representation of the strategy used to solve the problems due
to the knowledge system. The questions that analysis wants to answer are : "Which kind of task should we
solve ?", "How this kind of task should usually be solved", "How should we use this static knowledge to
solve our problem ?". The MASK language used to build the task model gives the description of the tasks
scheduling using a hierarchical recursive decomposition of a high level task into lower levels sub-tasks.
Each non terminal task has a type which describes the way it controls its sub-tasks. A sequential task will
execute its sub-tasks in the specified order. A parallel task will execute its sub-tasks at the same time. A
conditional task will execute only its sub-tasks which condition is true. An iterative task will execute its sub-
tasks in a loop changing each time their parameters. The tree that this model produces is called the control
flow. This control flow is characteristic of the problem solving strategy and can be graphically presented
(Error! Reference source not found.)

7
 J u rid ic o-te c h n ic a l
a n a ys is

W as the H um an M ac hin e Interfac e a

an W as th e m ac hin e d es ign a k ey
k ey elem ent of th e inc id ent ? elem ent of th e inc id ent ?

In c o m p a tib le us e
In c o m p a tib le us e
a n a lys is
a n a lys is

F or eac h
In v olv ed p art

Id e n tify in v o lv e d
p a rts

Id e n tify re la te d C o m p a re
Id e n tify re la te d C o m p a re
re g le m e n ta tio ns re g le m e n ta tio
ré ire ns
s aanndd
re g le m e n ta tio ns ré g le m e n ta ire s a n d
p ro te c tio n d e v ic e s
p ro te c tio n d e v ic e s

Figure 6 . MASK : the Juridico-technical analysis modelling

4.2.3 The psycho-cognitive analysis

Consequences

P ro fe s s io n W o rk a c c id e n t
d is e a s e

- C a n ce r C o m m o n a c c id e n t S e rio u s a c c id e n t
- D e a fn e ss
-…

D is a b le m e n t D e a th

Figure 7 . MASK : An accident consequences in woodworking machines use

The concept model (Figure 7.) gives the "static" aspect of the knowledge. To treat the problem, mainly two
semantic mental structures exist that we call the network models and the properties models [Caron, 1989]. In
knowledge engineering vocabulary, we call them respectively semantic network and object-oriented
diagram. When the object-oriented diagram enhances the properties embedding them with the concept they
describe, the semantic network enhances the relationships between the concepts. These two models can
often be considered as equivalent, under certain circumstances. The concepts model mixes the two points of
view.

8
An object depicts a real world entity. As this entity is unique, the object is unique as well, and hence, have
its own identity. A concept depicts a category of objects which all have the same properties. An object
belongs to a concept, we then say it is an instance of this concept. The common properties of a concept are
represented by its attributes. Then we want to describe how the concepts are hierarchically organised. For
this purpose we use the specialisation relationship. Finally we have a value relationship that gives the
possible values a concept can have

4.2.4 The evolution analysis

Knowledge System evolution can be partly modelled by the context defined by history of mutations and
accommodations. The historical analysis aims at describing the evolution of objects and techniques among
years and experiences. So, it provides a contextual representation of the evolution.

In this type of analysis, technologies and objects will be classified in order to represent their evolution
among milestones. Objectives underlining each milestone can be also identified. The influence between
elements is emphasizing as arrows (Error! Reference source not found.).

 1970  1978  1981

IN R S and the
h om o lo gation T echnical
com m ittee C onsultation expertise authority N ational decision authority

G ive a technical opinion W rite technical report about W

w ood
ood- F orbid dangerous
use of dangereous
w ood
about Ww ood
ood mwachines
orking m achines mwachines
orking msecurity
achines safety mWachines
ood w orking m achines

 1976: Law to im prove w orking conditions

 1993
 1946  1978
S ecu rity ru les
M achines H om ologation R ules to
of dangereous N ational certification
rules m achines rules

D raw attention to the m achine O bligation to integrate the safety

security in W ork w ith w ood m achines industry in
security
safety the m achines design order to design security technical
solutions

Figure 8 . The historic track of safety rules and homologation in woodworking machines
analysis.

Another model (called generation model) is defined in order to emphasis concept bases of a
knowledge system. It reflects a mental analysis of concept evolution (how and why). This model is
adapted from technology history theory [Defore, 1985]. The generation model describes in fact, a
concept or object succession that corresponds to a progression of techniques and their amelioration.
This type of model (Error! Reference source not found.) represents the evolution of a generation:
mutation, alteration, bifurcation, interruption, etc. Main evolution motive is also showed in this
model. There is also a number of argumentation elements which describes even positive and negative
consequences of each generation.

9
 S em antic netw ork,object oriented form alism Inform ation system m odelling

A rgum entation
A rgum entation

C o gn itiv e rep resen tation K n ow led g e system

of k n ow led g e rep resen tation
reason n in g rep resen tation
C o gn itiv e P sych olo g y (p rod u ction ru les)

A rgum entation

M athem atical logic

K n ow led g e form al rep resen tation
p rop ostion al, m od al, u n c ertain, … lo gic

K now ledge form al R epresentation

M athem atical representation of know ledg
+
{
élém ent1
O bjectives :
D efinition of theorical bases for cognitive S everal logical representation
representation
representation level -
D ealing w ith specific problem s (diagnostic,
+ M onitoring, … )

{
élém ent2

P roblem s
- F orgettin g of th e sp ecific kn o w led ge p rob le m

specific know ledge representation tool

+
{
élém ent3

M ethode - M issin g of kn o w led ge acq u isition m eth od

Figure 9 . An example of Generation model with MASK (adapted from knowledge engineering
application)

4.3 Knowledge sharing with MASK

The memory, built by MASK, is considered as a knowledge book which can be edited as a real book. So, it
is necessary to follow a specific procedure : submission, reviewing content and presentation and publishing
under different aspects, respecting users' needs, workspace and habits.

For instance, the organization memory built for the woodworking machine safety, is presented under two
aspects : a paper book (Error! Reference source not found.) and multimedia knowledge book. In machines
safety analysis, paper books are usually considered as good references. Analysts use also Hypermedia tools
(especially the Web). So, we defined also a multimedia knowledge book which gathers models, definitions
and references with an hypermedia access facilities (Figure 11 . ).

10
Knowledge sharing does not consist only to present knowledge to users, but they have to recognize it as a
reference. MASK recommends to organize consensual meetings in order to invite actors, especially experts'
teams to recognize knowledge kept as reference of some of their activities. With these meetings a
knowledge network can be defined. This network help actors to know which part of the memory can be
reused in their activity and when. Meetings will be also organized with hierarchical managers that can
approve knowledge book as references of the organization.

C h a p itre 1 : In tro d u ctio n

2 .1 . T re a te m e n t o f a n In c id e n t

C h a p itre 2 : A n a lysis o f a n In cid e n t

2 .1 T re a te m e n t o f a n In cid e n t G e ttin g
Incident G e ttin g
In fo rm a tio n
 G e ttin g In fo rm a tio n In fo rm a tio n
Inform ation
 T e ch n ic a l a n a lysis about
 A p p ro ve m e n t Incident
2 .2 Ju rid ico-te ch n ica l a n a lysis T e ch nical
T e ch nical
a n a lysis
2 .3 R e co m m e n d a tio n a n a lysis

C h a p itre 3 : P h e n o m e n a o f d a n g e rs Synthetic
report

C h a p itre 4 : W o o d m a ch in e s cla ssifica tio n A p p ro ve m e n t

A p p ro ve m e n t

C h a p itre 5 : W o o d m a ch in e s se cu rity h isto riq u e

Validated
R eport
A p p e n d ic e s

Figure 10 . Paper knowledge book presentation

5 Towards a knowledge reuse and appropriation

As a first step to facilitate memory reuse, we recommend some ergonomic procedures to specify knowledge
access. These procedures will be specific for each form of the knowledge book : paper, hypermedia, etc. We
studied only some navigation principles in this aim. We propose models as a base of this navigation. As
noted above, these models were inherited from cognitive analysis, So, that they can be accessible by a large
number of users. For instance, this type of navigation have been privileged in the paper book defined in
woodworking machines safety memory (Error! Reference source not found.) and also in business process
services one.

Hypermedia techniques provides several ways of access. In the woodworking machines safety memory, we
defined in addition of the navigation by models (cognitive schema), a navigation by theme (structural
schema) (Figure 11 . ). Other types of navigation can be also studied corresponding to users' workspace and
needs.

The model presentation in MASK is also based on a color chart which help to distinguish the duality of
knowledge. Knowledge, with MASK, is characterized respecting two dualities : context versus signification,
functions versus structure. So we use the duality of colors to present indirectly the knowledge type duality
(Figure 12 . ). In fact, activity and phenomena describe the context of an expertise, task and concept
represent the semantic. Otherwise, activity and task are functional description and phenomena and concept
are structured one.

In addition, techniques to organize training sessions and to promulgate knowledge reuse in order to facilitate
knowledge sharing can be proposed. Memory reuse must be evaluated and knowledge representation must
be modified consequently. We have not yet studied memory reuse evaluation and knowledge appropriation.
Ergonomic activity analysis will give some guidelines to study knowledge appropriation process.

11
 Figure 11 . Hypermedia knowledge book

6 Conclusion

Knowledge is considered nowadays as the main asset of an enterprise. The know-how of actors in an
organization is an important concurrence factor. There is a number of approaches that studied how this
knowledge can be capitalized in an organization. Some of these approaches have inherited techniques from
knowledge engineering, especially methodological and modelling guidelines. But these guidelines cannot be
used as directly suggested in knowledge engineering techniques. The objectives of knowledge capitalization
is different from building knowledge based systems in which the knowledge must be coherent, operational
and treat a large number of problems.

A ctivity

B lu e F u n ctio n
C o ntex t B lu e

G reen M a g en ta

P h en o m en a T a sk

M a g en ta
G reen

O ra n g e O ra n g e
S ig n ifica tio n
S tru ctu re

C o n cep t

Figure 12 . Model presentation based on colour dualities

12
 Knowledge capitalization methods must offer a light process that can be used without perturbing the
organization activity. We defined in this paper a number of success keys that can help a knowledge engineer
to capitalize knowledge in this way. We can summarize these keys by :

Co-modelling done interactively by knowledge engineer and expert(s),

Mirroring phenomena: expert(s) recognize models at a mirror of his knowledge,
Homogeneous presentation of models corresponding with actors languages and formalism,
Memory so built must be unless recognized by expert(s) teams and approved by the hierarchy,
Use of ergonomic procedures and communication means in order to facilitate memory access and
sharing,
Memory must be built in a flexible way expecting changes and evolution.

The MASK method have been defined in order to respect these keys. Its application in several domains have
proved its success and its respect of some of the keys noted above. Especially, the co-modelling tackled by
model guided interviews, the mirroring phenomena enhanced by the generic structure of models that
corresponds to the structural and cognitive representation of a human activity, the homogeneous
presentation with actor languages due to the flexibility of the model representations and modelling tools, the
tackling of knowledge sharing enhanced by a presentation under different points of view and use of several
memory supports (paper, hypermedia, etc.).

We are studying techniques to enhance knowledge reuse and to evaluate its contribution in an organization.
Our analysis of the evolution theory will guide us to study the evolution of an organizational memory and to
support it by a dynamic method. We also deal with the influence of the knowledge history in the innovation.

1. 5. REFERENCES
[Barthelmé et al,1998] Barthelmé F., Ermine J.L., Camille Rosenthal-Sabroux An architecture for
knowledge evolution in organisations, European Journal of Operational Research 109, 414-427 (1998)
[Caron, 1989] Caron J.: Précis de psycholinguistique, P.U.F, Paris, 1989
[Dieng et al, 2000] Dieng R., Corby O., Giboin A., Golebiwska J., Matta N., Ribière M., Méthodes et outils
pour la gestion des connaissances, Dunod., 2000
[Deforge, 19 85] Y. Deforge : Technologie et génétique de l'objet industriel, Maloine ed., Paris, 1985
[Ermine, 1996] J-L. Ermine, M. Chaillot, P. Bigeon, B. Charreton, D. Malavieille : MKSM, a method for
knowledge management, Knowledge Management, Organization, Competence and Methodology,
Advances in Knowledge Management Volume 1, , Jos. F. Shreinemakers Ed., pp 288 - 302, Ergon, 1996
[Ermine, 2000] Ermine J-L: Les systèmes de connaissances, Edition Hermès, Paris, 2000
[IGL, 1982] IGL, France : Introduction à SADT, Manuel, 1982
[Le Moigne, 1977] Le Moigne J-L : La théorie du système général, P.U.F.,1977,2nd edition. 1984
[Matta et al, 2001] Matta N. Ermine J.L., Aubertin G., Trivin J.Y., Knowledge Capitalization with a
knowledge engineering approach : the MASK method, proceedings of IJCAI’2001 Workshop on
Knowledge Management and Organizational Memory, August 2001.
[Nonaka, 1995] I. Nonaka, H. Takeuchi: The knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies
Create the Dynamics of Innovation. Oxford University Press, 1995

13

View publication stats