Taxonomies for Development

{Excerpt} Organizations spend millions of dollars on management systems without commensurate investments in the categorization needed to organize the information they rest on. Taxonomy work is strategic work: it enables efficient and interoperable retrieval and sharing of data, information, and knowledge by building needs and natural workflows in intuitive structures. Bible readers think that taxonomy is the world’s oldest profession. Whatever the case, the word is now synonymous with any hierarchical system of classification that orders domains of inquiry into groups and signifies natural relationships among these. (A taxonomic scheme is often depicted as a “tree” and individual taxonomic units as “branches” in the tree.) Almost anything can be classified according to some taxonomic scheme. Resulting catalogs provide conceptual frameworks for miscellaneous purposes including knowledge identification, creation, storage, sharing, and use, including related decision making

No accounting for risk

At the present time, the relation between accounting praxis and risk is not well understood. Accounting praxis does not appear to regard the risk it identifies with its activities as being different from 'objective risk' - the concept of risk found in positive financial and accounting research. Instead accounting praxis (as reflected in case studies, surveys and other empirical studies) reveal a collection of different, sometimes contradictory, conceptions and 'taken for granted' understandings of risk that are invoked and applied on an ad hoc, case by case basis. The aim of this paper is to demonstrate that the conceptual disarray in accounting for risk is both costly and unnecessary. Taking an interdisciplinary approach to risk research, the authors review developments in risk thinking at the end of the 20th Century and highlight a way forward for accounting through New Paradigm Risk (NPR). Various illustrations and case study examples are drawn upon to reflect the relevance of NPR to accounting praxis

Alat pemungut tandan kelapa sawit darjah kebebasan

Kelapa sawit merupakan tanaman yang menyumbang kepada industri penghasilan minyak di dunia seperti minyak masak, minyak industri, dan minyak bahan bakar (biodiesal). Pulangan dari sektor pertanian khususnya kelapa sawit sangat menguntungkan. Kini ramai petani telah bertukar ke tanaman kelapa sawit. Indonesia merupakan pengeluar minyak kelapa sawit terbesar di dunia [1]. Dengan terdapatnya pembukaan ladang sawit secara besar-besaran maka banyaklah syarikat-syarikat pertanian mula mencipta alat atau mesin yang baik untuk mencepatkan proses memetik dan mengeluarkan sawit dari ladang. Namun alatan yang lebih mesra pengguna dilihat tidak dipandang serius. Atas isu ini timbul idea mencipta alat pemungut tandan kelapa sawit darjah kebebasan. Semua sedia maklum untuk mengeluarkan sawit dari ladang perlunya meletakan tandan sawit ke dalam kereta sorong terlebih dahulu.Untuk meletakan sawit ke dalam kereta sorong T-shape palm fruit shank diperlukan. Pekebun akan mengangkat sawit yang telah dipetik dari pokok menggunakan alatan tersebut.Tanpa disedari alatan ini membahayakan pekebun dan membebankan. Pekebun memerlukan tenaga yang banyak untuk mengangkat tandan sawit yang amat berat ke dalam kereta sorong. Selain itu, mengangkat bebanan yang berat dalam kuantiti yang banyak menyebabkan sakit dibahagian tulang belakang pekebun. Di samping itu, mata alat yang tajam dan terdedah meningkatkan risiko kecederaan pekebun. Duri pada buah sawit juga bahaya pada pekebun

Overcoming Roadblocks to Learning

{Excerpt} The gulf between the ideal type of a learning organization and the state of affairs in typical bilateral and multilateral development agencies remains huge. Defining roadblocks, however numerous they may be, is half the battle to removing them—it might make them part of the solution instead of part of the problem. Organizational learning is collective learning by individuals, and the fundamental phenomena of individual learning apply to organizations. However, organizational learning has distinctive characteristics concerning what is learned, how it is learned, and the adjustments needed to enhance learning. These owe to the fact that an organization is, by general definition, a collective whose individual constituents work to achieve a common goal from discrete operating and supporting units. Practices bring different perspectives and cultures to bear and shape data, information, and knowledge flows. Political considerations are the most serious impediment to becoming a learning organization. However, by understanding more fully what obstacles to learning can exist in a complex organization in a complex environment, one can circumscribe the problem space and create enabling environments for a more positive future. Such environments would facilitate self-organization, exploration of the space of possibilities, generative feedback, emergence, and coevolution.They would create an explanatory framework and facilitate action

Notions of Knowledge Management

{Excerpt} Knowledge management is getting the right knowledge to the right people at the right time, and helping them (with incentives) to apply it in ways that strive to improve organizational performance. Data are facts, and information is interpreted data. Knowledge is created and organized by flows of information, shaped by their holder. It is tacit or explicit. Tacit knowledge is nonverbalized, intuitive, and unarticulated knowledge that people carry in their heads. It is hard to formalize and communicate because it is rooted in skills, experiences, insight, intuition, and judgment, but it can be shared in discussion, storytelling, and personal interactions. It has a technical dimension, which encompasses skills and capabilities referred to as know-how. It has a cognitive dimension, which consists of beliefs, ideals,values, schemata, or mental models. Explicit knowledge is codified knowledge that can be expressed in writing, drawings, or computer programs, for example, and transmitted in various forms. Tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge are mutually complementary forms of meaning

A knowledge development lifecycle for reflective practice

Reflective practice is valuable because of its potential for continuous improvement through feedback and learning. Conventional models of knowledge practice however do not explicitly include reflection as part of the practice, nor locate it in a developmental cycle. They focus on modelling in a knowledge plane which itself is contextualised by active knowing processes, and ignore the influence of power in their activity models. Further, many models focus on either an artefact or a process view, resulting from a conceptual disconnect between knowledge and knowing, and failure to relate passive to active views. Using the idea of higher order loops that govern knowledge development processes, in this paper we propose a conceptualisation of a reflective Knowledge Development Life Cycle (KDLC). This explicitly includes the investigator and the organisation itself as dynamic components of a systemic process and is suited to either a constructivist or realist epistemological stance. We describe the stages required in the KDLC and discuss their significance. Finally we show how incorporation of reflection into process enables dynamic interplay between the knowing and the knowledge in the organisation

Co-guarantor attributes: a systemic approach to evaluating expert support

The paper suggests features of a generic framework which can assist in highlighting good practice as well as revealing shortcomings in expert support for management decision-making. Following the earlier writings of Habermas, I argue that expertise might be identified and considered as a set of �co-guarantor attributes� based upon knowledge constitutive interests. Co-guarantor attributes can be used as a benchmark for evaluation, where affirmative features of expert support can be identified as well as the incidence of �false guarantor� attributes which might be significant in perpetuating costly and unsuccessful intervention

Third sector accounting and accountability in Australia: anything but a level playing field

This research report seeks to understand why some Australian not-for-profit organisations make voluntary financial disclosures beyond their basic statutory obligations. Introduction This paper surveys previous work on voluntary information disclosures in accounting reports of Australian Not-for-Profit organisations (NFPs). This is new research and is a part of a project to evolve a comprehensive explanation of why Australian NFPs disclose what they do disclose; and to capture and explain patterns of variations between NFPs between what they regard to disclose and the type of information they disclose. To accomplish this, first some background information about the NFP sector are considered. Then, the Australian NFP sector is reviewed. Third, the information needs of some key stakeholders are briefly discussed. Next, the research methodology where a literature survey which looks at not just disclosures to NFPs but to the commercial sector that are plausibly &nbsp