This paper draws from the experience of undertaking what has been termed 'knowledge management' work, and outlines the approach being taken, which has focused on the conceptual design of human processes. This paper presents a way of thinking about knowledge management as a set of processes involving (for example) (i) the human process to which human knowledge is applied (e.g. an 'operation' of some sort), (ii) the human process in which knowledge is encouraged to be developed (e.g. a course of study, application of techniques, thinking, reflection etc), (iii) a process of reviewing a the experience in problematic situation in order that learning can be derived (e.g. an 'after action review'), (iv) the integration of all the above processes which is in some way 'managed' and 'co‑ordinated' through the process of undertaking work as a 'knowledge manager'. The approach being taken assumes that it is the processes that are being managed, rather than the knowledge per se. The paper outlines the approach taken which draws upon the experiences, difficulties and anxieties of taking responsibility for a knowledge management initiative associated with the EU funded MEDFORIST project.

This research focuses on analysing knowledge processes of the design process, especially the early phases of the design process that can be called concept design. It aims at developing a body of knowledge that builds on the relevant issues toward user‑centred design in a form of a framework. This is intended to apply, organise and synthesise processes, theories and concepts from the separate but linked disciplines of knowledge management and human‑ computer interaction, hence addressing one of the most essential topics and goals of system design, i.e. how to define what is needed in the system and how the system should mediate human activities„for the purposes of this research, in the context of interest‑based communities and mobile technology. The framework is based on the following propositions: (1) The participants of design process include designers and users as actors, both of which are seen to possess knowledge needed toward successful design; (2) this knowledge is proposed to be context‑specific, hence being specific for certain users using certain technology; (3) for the user as well as for the design professional there are some things that are known but have not been articulated; and (4) the knowledge processes transforming tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge by users and designers are linked and need to be combined, finally (5) toward knowledge embedded into concepts, products, or services. Overall, the research highlights how knowledge processes enable user involvement and capturing tacit (and novel) user knowledge toward successful concept designdesign.

System design is mostly guided by the computational model of the mind, known as computational cognitivism. This model, traditionally based on Turing's Universal Machine, looms large behind the bulk of system design even in Intelligence Augmentation (IA) approach to human‑computer interaction, although with the seemingly obvious exception of connectionist approaches (e.g. neural networks, swarm intelligence). Other extensive computational models do exist (e.g. Hintikka and Mutanen's trial‑and‑error computability model and Peirce's semiotic model) but they have not yet been implemented in working computer systems. Computational cognitivism pictures the mind as a disembodied, decontextualized calculating machine, operating with logical‑ syntactic rules and principles. This view has in contemporary times been challenged from the quarters of biology, sociology, anthropology, linguistics, psychology and economics. Perhaps the best comprehensive label for this critical approach is grounded cognition. Grounded cognition conceptualises the mind as a complex process related to and partially constituted by body, environment, other minds and artefacts, thus calling for a corresponding re‑evaluation of knowing, understanding, learning, perception, action, interaction and reasoning. The aim of this paper is to tentatively examine whether these insights into natural cognition could inform the system design of mobile systems which support nomadic knowledge workers as well as the man in the street. Computer supported (automated) context building is of special interest here as the human way(s) of being in the world presents a particular challenge to this part of system design.

This paper describes and reflects on the implementation of a Knowledge Based Holistic Design Support System – termed “HolD” – into a business environment. The paper introduces the rationale and development behind the system, a consciously different approach to traditional knowledge based systems in engineering in order to meet the requirements of a small business, producing bespoke low volume products. Typical knowledge based engineering systems rely on explicitly codified knowledge which often supports product optimisation rather than creative design activities. Such a system would provide little benefit to a business producing bespoke products. Instead, the system presented here, supports the creativity of designers through codified tacit knowledge input by designers as meta‑data for past designs. The problem of individual inertia in adopting the system and sharing knowledge was approached early in the construction of the system. The steps taken to lower user barriers and encourage day‑to‑day use are detailed, including the design of a multi‑stage input process designed to interact at key stages of users' existing processes. The immediate results after a six month trial period are presented and the results show slower than anticipated usage. In particular designers were found to be reluctant to input detailed information beyond common identifying data and did not attempt to seek information from the system. The reasons for this slower usage are discussed and possible solutions presented. The paper therefore provides industrial based evidence of the inertia encountered when implementing a knowledge system and argues that technology alone is insufficient to overcome this inertia.

Many innovative businesses formed around energy or bio‑related activities, for instance, are often the result of collective action of organisations involved in many‑sided markets, which can be found in and around focusing environments such as business incubators or tech¬no¬logy centres. Within such environments, group interests beyond those of single producers and their immediate clients exist and interfere. Rather generically, important economic outcomes of innovations are se¬quen¬ces of cost reduc¬¬tion events, the pace of which is influenced by technology and networking alike. Moreover, new products or technologies are producing long term costs difficult to anticipate, which eventually, in response to private and public awareness and knowledge formation, will have to be inter¬nalized. More traditional industries like textiles rely in general on conservative business models and use new technology in rather restricted ways. Product design is fashion orien¬ted and there¬fore predominantly “artistic” in nature, distribution channels are directed towards out¬lets facilitating physical contact of clients with the produce. New technology enters main¬ly via more mechanized production cycles for a given set of narrowly defined final products. The formation of Intellectual Capital (IC) in such industries is a slow. The presence of low creativity products indicates underutilization of both new product concepts and tech¬nological possi¬bilities. Participative design procedures for new product concepts using appropriate eCommerce features point here towards a way out. Such features include well adapted recommender systems based on trust creation and opinion formation. We propose to model the effects of these long term costs of new technology and the possibly complementary effects of participative design procedures by economic agents acting within specific adaptable neighbourhoods and by formation of some trust related assets. Thereafter, the influ¬ence exerted between firms is increasing in firm similarity, in the degree of product complementarity, and it also depends on (mutual) trust relations. A sustainable innovation is more expensive than a regular one but it may lead to long term benefits and to durable competitive advantage, espe¬cially if many firms from the network collude. The associated opinion formation process which leads to sustainable innovation may be viewed as a collec¬tive cognitive process resem¬bling that of branding and re‑branding. A similar trust‑based opinion formation is also regarded as part of a pro¬ce¬dure for assessing the acceptance of many new or parallel product concepts as they derive from Participative design procedures anticipating future product uses. Stylized dynamic models, which entail an opinion formation process, can in turn be identified with different levels of sustainability commitment by innovating and imitating firms within a dynamic multi‑firm setting. Such models tend to display the statistical behaviour of some aggregates known to occur in empirical innovative processes.

The Internet is enabling a new economy based on the networking of human knowledge. While the benefits of using I.T. to connect people to people and people to information within a business are commonly understood, much less is known about the advantages of well‑managed partnerships across corporate boundaries. Building on the findings of a recent study of knowledge creating collaborations (Gadman and Cooper 2003), and the growing interest in Open Source Software development communities, (Von Hipple and Von Krogh 2003), (Cole and Lee 2003), this paper addresses the importance of selecting the most appropriate collaborative strategy to meet business needs and the challenges of managing relationships which often span organizational cultures and boundaries. The findings are relevant to any company that depends on the free flow of ideas among smart people and provides a lens through which we can learn and discover new and creative possibilities for the future.

Business Process Redesign (BPR) helps rethinking a process in order to enhance its performance. Practitioners have been developing methodologies to support BPR implementation. However, most methodologies lack actual guidance on deriving a process design threatening the success of BPR. In this paper, we suggest the use of a case‑based reasoning technique (CBR) to support solving new problems by adapting previously successful solutions to similar problems to support redesigning new business processes by adapting previously successful redesign to similar business process. An implementation framework for BPR and the CBR's cyclical process are used as a knowledge management technical support to serve for the effective reuses of redesign methods as a knowledge creation and sharing mechanism.

Business Process Redesign (BPR) is undertaken to achieve order‑of‑magnitude improvements over 'old' form of the organisation. Practitioners in the academia and business world have developed a number of methodologies to support this competitive restructuring that forms the current focus of concern, many of which have not been successful. This paper suggests the use of Data Mining (DM) as a technique to support the process of redesigning a business by extracting the much‑needed knowledge hidden in large volumes of data maintained by the organization through the DM models.