Search results

On August 26, 1971, OCLC introduced the online union catalog and shared cataloging system. During the 1970s, OCLC focused its efforts on creating and expanding the online cataloging system and telecommunications network. It added an online interlibrary loan system in 1979. In the 1980s, OCLC began adapting distributed computing and microcomputing technologies as its product and service lines expanded to some 60 offerings. The organization also began looking at ways to move beyond bibliography by furnishing information not only to library staffs, but also to library patrons. In the 1990s, OCLC launched a new core business in reference services. (Smith, 1998, pp. 251–252). Now, in the 21st century, OCLC is introducing tools, services and infrastructure to manage the life cycle of digital content in libraries.

Knowledge management aims to increase an organization's competitive advantage through the collective management of its employees' knowledge. In the past, knowledge management was very technologically oriented, with a focus on data mining, software, and artificial intelligence, but in recent years there has been a move toward incorporating social aspects. As knowledge management evolved into its second era, the focus shifted to defining knowledge, developing frameworks, and implementing content management systems. The current knowledge management era (third) appears to be more integrated with an organization's philosophy, goals, and day-to-day activities, and is also the “softest” with regards to a people-oriented approach (Metaxiotis, Ergazakis, & Psarras, 2005; Wiig, 2002). As knowledge management moves further into the third era, no theoretical foundation exists. As will be seen, knowledge is an unmanageable, nontransferable entity that cannot exist outside a person's brain (Abou-Zeid, 2007). As such it is not possible to define the concept of knowledge, nor even desirable, and this is in direct contrast to first generation knowledge management, which aimed to accurately define the concept of knowledge (Metaxiotis et al., 2005). The focus on frameworks (Holsapple & Joshi, 1997), systems (Hasan & Gould, 2003), and technology (Liao, 2003) that dominated second-generation knowledge management is also not compatible with the current understanding of knowledge (Abou-Zeid, 2007), suggesting that systems cannot directly manage knowledge.

Introduction – Bologna’s summit guidelines regarding the Bachelor/Master structure, which is currently used in most Colleges and Universities, were mostly aimed at standardising the educational system in European higher education. Educational institutions use these guidelines as a basis for setting up their educational model.

Aim – This chapter aims to review models of learning management systems (LMSs), the stage of activity of every method applied at Universities, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of these prototypes. The literature review in question identifies and classifies strategic methods of LMS, differentiates method type and categorises common activities.

Results – The results show that higher education institutions are in the preparatory phase regarding the application of e-learning, whereas private institutions have applied this system since their foundation and use it on a daily basis across all services.

Conclusion – However, different educational institutions in our country are at different stages in implementing new learning models. A strategic plan for developing knowledge management systems can be determined by using some of the information system strategic methods.

Originality/Value – This chapter contributes to the literature by providing additional evidence for existing studies in LMS in the Universities of the Republic of Kosovo. Studies suggest the implementation of different models and highlight the impact of technology especially during this pandemic whereby we should mainly focus and implement curricula using these kinds of technology. Also, this study identifies a major weakness in existing Kosovar studies, which have identified concepts but they are not implemented at all.

Numerous studies have identified various unintended adverse consequences (UACs) of implementing health information technology (HIT). For example, UACs identified in the context of Computerized Physician Order Entry (CPOE) implementation include unfavorable workflow issues, generation of new types of errors, untoward changes in communication patterns, and problems of paper persistence.

However, gaps remain in understanding why UACs from HIT implementation occur, and how they may be overcome. The technology-in-practice (TIP) framework emphasizes the role of human agency (or individual action) in enacting structures of technology use (or technologies-in-practice) and other social structures within the organization. As such, given a set of UACs from HIT implementation, the TIP framework can help trace them back to specific actions (types of HIT-in-practice) and institutional conditions (social structures).

However, insofar as the TIP framework can help understand causes of UACs, it does not shed light on how they may be overcome through strategic action. By contrast, the knowledge-in-practice (KIP) framework, which emanates from both human resource and knowledge management literatures, helps understand how information and communication technologies (ICTs) such as “Intranets” and the “Virtual Office” can be used alongside existing HIT systems (e.g., CPOE) to create new social structures, generate new KIP, and transform HIT-in-practice.

This chapter integrates the TIP and KIP literatures to develop an integrated framework for understanding and overcoming the UACs from HIT implementation. The framework is applied to existing evidence on UACs from CPOE implementation, to explain why they occur, and how they may be overcome. The application and ensuing discussion provide insight into strategies for successful HIT implementation in healthcare organizations, as well as recommendations for future research.