Posted by Robert Benjamin on August 24, 2000 at 15:40:22:

In Reply to: Re: what's the way to represent tacik knowledge of an enterprise? posted by John Tieso on August 23, 2000 at 21:52:14:

Hi John

Ah! Now I see. I fully agree with your view, as per your definitions, this is exactly how the framework is applied. Speaking of processes. Given all the logic that binds the relationships within your framework together, I have a theory that a process hierarchy and order could be derived by running a process of elimination logic (whatever that really means) over the logical and physical functional models.

The theory proposes that duplicate functions would probably indicate process boundaries (or sub-processes) and that if the model construct has been applied successfully, that no functions should be left standing alone. A further thought is that if one could visualise all the processes as somehow related in a cat-o'-nine-tails structure, that cracking the whip (so to speak) would make all the processes fall into place, leaving one with the most critical processes in one's hand. :-)

OK, so I am having fun. I'll build a tool to test these theories, unless you could direct me to process-simulation software that relates to, if I may, our common framework and definitions.

Best regards

Robert

---

Follow Ups:

• Re: what's the way to represent tacik knowledge of an enterprise? John Tieso 14:39:21 08/26/00 (3)
  • Re: what's the way to represent tacik knowledge of an enterprise? Robert Benjamin 02:27:11 08/28/00 (2)
    • Re: what's the way to represent tacik knowledge of an enterprise? John Tieso 08:31:46 08/28/00 (1)
      • Re: what's the way to represent tacik knowledge of an enterprise? Robert Benjamin 16:50:45 08/28/00 (0)

---

Click Here to Post Follow Up in New Forums

    Knowledge Management Think Tank (New)

  

 Subject: 

Message: