Know-How Mapping – A Goal-Oriented Approach and Evaluation

  • Arnon SturmEmail author
  • Eric Yu
  • Sadra Abrishamkar
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 287)


Information system developers have to cope with a continually changing technological landscape. Knowing what each kind of technique or technology can do and how well they perform under various conditions constitute an important kind of know-how that systems professionals seek. In this paper, we claim that such know-how information can be structured as a map, so as to facilitate understanding and decision making about what technology to adopt or develop. Recent work has proposed to use a goal-oriented approach to address the challenge of constructing such a map. In this paper, we examine the hypothesis that a goal-oriented approach can be used for mapping and analyzing technological domains. First, we apply the approach to several domains, to verify the applicability and expressiveness of the approach. Second, we perform a feature-based analysis and examine the extent to which the approach addresses the desired characteristics of a know-how map. Third, we conduct a controlled experiment in which the comprehension of goal-oriented know-how maps in comparison to a textual summary from a literature review was examined. The evaluation results indicate that the goal-oriented know-how maps have sufficient expressiveness, are easy to read and understand, and address a number of desired characteristics.


Enterprise Architecture Goal Modeling Information System Engineering Architecture Description Language Tabular Representation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Balaid, A., Abd Rozan, M.Z., Hikmi, S.N., Memon, J.: Knowledge maps: a systematic literature review and directions for future research. Int. J. Inform. Manage. 36(3), 451–475 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bracewell, R., Wallace, K., Moss, M., Knott, D.: Capturing design rationale. Comput. Aided Des. 41(3), 173–186 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Budd, J.W.: Mind maps as classroom exercises. J. Econ. Educ. 35(1), 35–46 (2004). Taylor & Francis LtdGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Eden, C., Ackermann, F., Cropper, S.: The analysis of cause maps. J. Manage. Stud. 29(3), 309–324 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Garud, R.: On the distinction between know-how, know-why, and know-what. Adv. Strateg. Manage. 14, 81–101 (1997)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gengler, C.E., Reynolds, T.J.: Consumer understanding and advertising strategy: analysis and strategic translation of laddering data. J. Adv. Res. 35, 19–33 (1995)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gross, D., Sturm, A., Yu, E.: Towards know-how mapping using goal modeling. In: iStar, pp. 115–120 (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kwasnik, B.: The role of classification in knowledge representation and discovery. Libr. Trends 48, 22–47 (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lenat, D.: CycL. Accessed April 2013
  10. 10.
    Liu, B.: Web Data Mining: Exploring Hyperlinks, Contents and Usage Data. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mylopoulos, J., Chung, L., Yu, E.: From object-oriented to goal-oriented requirements analysis. Commun. ACM 42(1), 31–37 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Novak, J.D., Cañas, A.J.: The Theory Underlying Concept Maps and How To Construct and Use Them, Institute for Human and Machine Cognition (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sarewitz, D., Nelson, R.R.: Progress in know-how: its origins and limits. Innovations 3(1), 101–117 (2008). MIT PressGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shum, S.B., Motta, E., Domingue, J.: ScholOnto: an ontology-based digital library server for research documents and discourse. Int. J. Digital Libr. 3(3), 237–248 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sowa, J.F.: Conceptual graphs for a data base interface. IBM J. Res. Dev. 20(4), 336–357 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sowa, J.F.: Semantic Networks, Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence. Wiley, New York (1992)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sturm, A., Gross, D., Wang, J., Nalchigar, S., Yu, E.: Mapping and usage of know-how contributions. In: Nurcan, S., Pimenidis, E. (eds.) CAiSE Forum 2014. LNBIP, vol. 204, pp. 102–115. Springer, Cham (2015). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-19270-3_7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Uren, V., Shum, S.B., Bachler, M., Li, G.: Sensemaking tools for understanding research literatures: design, implementation and user evaluation. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 64(5), 420–445 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Van Lamsweerde, A.: Requirements Engineering: from System Goals to UML Models to Software Specifications. Wiley Publishing, Chichester (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yu, E., Giorgini, P., Maiden, N., Mylopoulos, J.: Social Modeling for Requirements Engineering. MIT Press, Cambridge (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of TorontoTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Ben-Gurion University of the NegevBeer ShevaIsrael

Personalised recommendations