(Apologies for multiple posting)


*KITA 2015 − 1st International Workshop on the design, development and use
of Knowledge IT Artifacts (KITA) in professional communities and
In conjunction with the 7th International Joint Conference on Knowledge
Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management - IC3K 2015,
Lisbon, Portugal, 12-14 November 2015.


*Important dates *
Paper submission: September 9, 2015
Author Notification: September 18, 2015
Camera-ready and registration: September 25, 2015

Broadly meant, a Knowledge Artifact (KA) is any artifact purposely built to
support knowledge-related processes; these latter include archival of and
access to knowledge sources, knowledge co-creation, knowledge sharing &
exchange, its retrieval and exploitation, its production & learning
(internalization). For this reason, KAs come in very different formats and
types: just to limit ourselves to the electronic KAs, what we can denote as
Knowledge IT artifacts (to hint at those specific IT artifacts, i.e.,
applications and software platforms, that specifically support knowledge
creation and sharing), examples include:

   - decision support systems that convey the most pertinent items from the
   knowledge bodies mentioned above according to the situation or the user
   requests, profiles and needs;
   - on-line digital platforms enabling an aggregation of firms (a cluster,
   a supply chain) to share valuable knowledge in order to achieve specific
   strategic aims (such as internationalization, new product development, lean
   - online wiki encyclopedias and manuals that represent objectively, if
   not structuredly (e.g., ontologically) a body of specialist knowledge;
   - multimedia learning software that integrate different content sources
   and interactive techniques to have users develop both intellectual and
   practical competencies on the basis of the knowledge embedded in the

This heterogeneity of artifacts reflects both the heterogeneity of the
application domains where knowledge must be computationally supported (R&D
departments in organizations, Teaching Institutions, Communities of
Practice and Communities of Knowledge) but also widely different design
approaches and perspectives in regard to what knowledge is, how to tap in
it, how it circulates in human communities, and which enterprise business
models favour extracting value from it.
In a recent literature survey (Cabitza and Locoro, 2014), which was awarded
as the best paper of the previous KMIS conference, an extensive review of
the heterogeneous body of scholarly contributions that focus on the concept
of KA has allowed to draw a first interpretative and bottom-up framework to
pinpoint the main KA design poles: objectivity and situativity, seen as
dimensions which can be present at different degrees in each KITA. We
invite other authors to apply this framework to their cases to both
validate it and improve and enrich it, as a convenient interpretative lens
to characterize even very heterogeneous KAs: from the most model-based and
AI driven ones, where the effort of knowledge representation and
formalization by the designers is critical for the success of the final
application; to those applications that clearly adopt a more
constructivist, pragmatic and collaboration-oriented approach to knowledge
support (including enterprise social media, and wiki-based communities of
peer experts).
The idea behind the name (KITA) is to emphasize the role of (some,
specific) IT artifacts to play as scaffoldings of
knowing/learning/innovating processes and of practices of personal
appropriation of objective knowledge and skill development. In Japanese, or
better yet, in Otaku jargon, KITA is an exclamation that could be
translated in many ways, but also with “Got it!”, “here it comes”,
“Eureka”. It indicates a “aha moment” that we like to relate to when a raw
piece of information gets to inform its interpreter, and becomes situated,
so to say “living”, knowledge.

*Topics of interest*

   - Knowledge Artifacts Design and evaluation
   - Relationship btw Knowledge Management Technologies and IT Artifacts
   - Relationship btw Knowledge Management and Collaborative-oriented
   - Socio-Technical System Theory and Design
   - Models, Theories and Methodologies of Knowledge, Collaboration and
   - Knowledge and Data Visualization
   - Knowledge Artifacts and Collaboration at the firm level in clusters
   and supply chains
   - Learning Technologies
   - Business models enabled by Knowledge Artifacts
   - Pragmatic Web
   - Semiotic Engineering

*In particular, we are looking for*
Contributions from a potentially vast and inter-disciplinary community of
scholars interested in this topic, and especially for either full-research
or work-in-progress contributions that could report on experiences of
either design of a KA, or of its use in the field.
The most appreciated efforts of the contribution would lie in describing
the main assumptions related to the nature of the knowledge that the KA at
hand are intended to manage or support; in characterizing the main
objectives and goals that motivate the KA designers and users; and in
extracting both the implications for design and lessons learnt from
experience with KA that could fit the interest of a multi-disciplinary
community of scholars (across the fields of CSCL, CSCW, IR, KR, to mention
a few) that we aim to coalesce with this first workshop.
In the hope of the organizers, this workshop will set the practice-based
foundations to develop a common ground and language by which the "Knowledge
Artifact" construct can become useful both to inform the design and to
evaluate the impact of knowledge-oriented technologies in the communities
of practice that adopt them and adapt them to their ever-evolving bodies of

*Author Guidelines*

Full papers should be 8 pages long, including references, tables, graphs,
images and appendices. Work-in-progress should be 4 pages long,  including
references, tables, graphs, images and appendices. Submissions with less
than 4 pages or more than 13 pages will be automatically rejected.
Guidelines and templates available in the main conference Web site (
All accepted papers will be published in the main conference proceedings by
SCITEPRESS under an ISBN reference and will be submitted for indexation by
Thomson Reuters Conference Proceedings Citation Index (ISI), DBLP and

Selected papers in line with the quality standards of EJIS (European
Journal of Information Systems) will be taken into consideration for a
fast-track submission.

*Program Committee*
Jørgen P. Bansler - University of Copenhagen, DK
Merja Bauters - School of Arts, Design and Architecture Aalto University,
Helsinki, FI
Peter Bednar - University of Portsmouth, UK
Tina Blegind Jensen - Copenhagen Business School, Copenhagen, DK
Pernille Bjorn - University of Copenhagen, DK
Andrea Carugati - Aarhus Business School, DK
Monica Chiarini Tremblay - Florida International University, Miami, FL
Gianluca Colombo - Siris Academic SL- Barcelona, E
Claudia D’Amato - Università di Bari, I
Anna De Liddo - KMi (Knowledge Media Institute), The Open University, in
Milton Keynes, UK
Yeliz Eseryel - University of Groningen, NL
Daniela Fogli - Università degli Studi di Brescia, I
Anders Mørch - University of Oslo, NO
Katia Passerini - NJIT, New Jersey Institute of Technology, US
Antonio Piccinno - Università di Bari, I
Enrico Maria Piras - Fondazione Bruno Kessler - Trento, I
Christoph Richter - Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Institute of
Educational Science, D
Joan Rodon - Esade Business School, Barcellona, E
Carla Simone - Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, I
Paolo Spagnoletti - LUISS Guido Carli University, Rome, I
Giuseppe Vizzari - Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, I
Massimo Zancanaro - Fondazione Bruno Kessler - Trento, I

*Workshop chairs*
Federico Cabitza - Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy
Angela Locoro - Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy
Aurelio Ravarini - Università Carlo Cattaneo LIUC - Castellanza (VA), Italy

For further inquiries, please contact the workshop chairs at
[log in to unmask]

*Related readings*

   1. Alavi, M., and Leidner, D.E., 2001. Review: Knowledge Management and
   Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues.
   MIS Quarterly, Vol. 25, pp. 107−136.
   2. Brown, J.S. & Duguid, P. (2001). Knowledge and Organization: A
   Social-Practice Perspective. Organization Science, 12(2), 198−213.
   3. Burke, P. (2013). Social History of Knowledge. John Wiley & Sons
   4. Cabitza, F., & Locoro, A. (2015). “Made with Knowledge”:
   disentangling the IT Knowledge Artifact by a qualitative literature review.
   In J. Dietz, K. Liu, & J. Filipe (Eds.), Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge
   Engineering and Knowledge Management 5th International Joint Conference,
   IC3K 2014, Roma, Italy, October 21-24, 2014. (Vol. Forthcoming, pp. 64−75).
   5. Cabitza, F., Cerroni, A., Locoro, A., Simone, C. (2014). The
   Knowledge-Stream Model - A comprehensive model for knowledge circulation in
   communities of knowledgeable practitioners. KMIS 2014.
   6. Cabitza, F., (2013). At the boundary of communities and roles:
   boundary objects and knowledge artifacts as complementary resources for the
   design of information systems. From Information to Smart Society:
   Environment, Politics and Economics. LNISO. Springer, Berlin.
   7. Cabitza, F., Colombo, G., & Simone, C. (2013). Leveraging
   underspecification in knowledge artifacts to foster collaborative
   activities in professional communities. International Journal of
   Human-Computer Studies, 71(1), 24-45.
   8. Cook, S.D., Brown, J.S.(1999). Bridging epistemologies: The
   generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational
   knowing. Organ. Sci. 10, 4, 381−400.
   9. Davenport, T.H., Prusak, L., (1998). Working knowledge: How
   organizations manage what they know. Harvard Business Press.
   10. Eseryel, U. Y. (2014). IT-Enabled Knowledge Creation for Open
   Innovation.Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 15(11),
   11. Fogli D., Guida G., (2013). Knowledge-Centered Design of Decision
   Support Systems for Emergency Management,  Decision Support Systems, 55,
   pp. 336-347, 2013.
   12. Fogli, D., Cabitza, F. & Piccinno, A. (2014). “Each to His Own”:
   Distinguishing Activities, Roles and Artifacts in EUD Practices. In Smart
   Organizations and Smart Artifacts (pp. 193-205). Springer International
   13. Greenhalgh, T., Wieringa, S. (2011). Is it time to drop the
   “knowledge transla-tion”metaphor? A critical literature review. J. R. Soc.
   Med. 104, 12, 501−509.
   14. Grover V. and Kohli, R. (2012). Cocreating IT value: new
   capabilities and metrics for multifirm environments. MIS Q. 36, 1 (March
   2012), 225-232.
   15. Iandoli, L., Quinto, I., De Liddo, A., & Buckingham Shum, S. (2015).
   On online collaboration and construction of shared knowledge: Assessing
   mediation capability in computer supported argument visualization tools.
   Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology.
   16. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: how the sciences make
   knowledge. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
   17. Knorr-Cetina, K. (2001). Objectual Practice. In T. R. Schatzki, K.
   Knorr Cetina, & E. von Savigny (eds.). The Practice Turn in Contemporary
   Theory (pp. 175-188). London and NY: Routledge.
   18. Lyytinen, K., & Damsgaard, J. (2011). Inter-organizational
   information systems adoption − a configuration analysis approach. European
   Journal Of Information Systems Eur J Inf Syst, 20(5), 496−509.
   19. Mørch, A.I., Nygård, K.A. and Ludvigsen, S.R. (2009). Adaptation and
   Generalisation in Software Product Development. In H. Daniels et al.
   (Eds.), Activity theory in practice: Promoting learning across boundaries
   (pp. 184-205). London, UK: Taylor & Francis Books.
   20. Nygård, K.A. And Mørch, A.I. (2007). The Role of Boundary Crossing
   for Knowledge Advancement in Product Development. Proceedings of the Int'l
   Conference on Computers in Education (ICCE 2007), in T. Hirashima et al.
   (Eds.) Supporting Learning Flow Through Integrative Technologies, IOS
   Press, Amsterdam, pp. 183-186.
   21. Orlikowski, W. J. (2006). Material Knowing: The Scaffolding of Human
   Knowledgeability. European Journal of Information Systems, 15(5), 460−466.
   22. Orlikowski, W.J., Iacono, C.S. (2001). Desperately seeking the “IT”
   in IT research−A call to theorizing the IT artifact. Inf. Syst. Res. 12, 2,
   23. Paavola, S., Engeström, R., & Hakkarainen, K. (2012). The
   trialogical approach as a new form of mediation. In Collaborative knowledge
   creation (pp. 1-14). SensePublishers.
   24. Richter, C., Allert, H., Albrecht, J., & Ruhl, E. (2015). Grappling
   with the Not-Yet-Known. In: O. Lindwall, P. Häkkinen, T. Koschman, P.
   Tchounikine, & S. Ludvigsen (Eds.) Exploring the Material Conditions of
   Learning: The Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) Conference
   2015, Volume 1 (pp. 284-291). Gothenburg, Sweden: The International Society
   of the Learning Sciences.
   25. Salazar-Torres, G., Colombo, E., Da Silva, F. S. C., Noriega, C. A.,
   & Bandini, S. (2008). Design issues for knowledge artifacts.
   Knowledge-Based Systems, 21(8), 856−867.
   26. Sowa, J.F. (1999). Knowledge representation: logical, philosophical,
   and computational foundations.
   27. Spagnoletti, P., Resca, A., & Lee, G. (2015). A design theory for
   digital platforms supporting online communities: a multiple case study. J
   Inf Technol Journal Of Information Technology.
   28. Stahl, G., Ludvigsen, S., Law, N., & Cress, U. (2014). CSCL
   artifacts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative
   Learning, 9(3), 237-245.
   29. Verbeek, P.P., (2005). Artifacts and Attachment: A Post-Script
   Philosophy of Mediation. In: Inside the Politics of Technology : Agency and
   Normativity in the Co-Production of Technology and Society. Amsterdam
   University Press, pp. 125-146.

    For news of CHI books, courses & software, join CHI-RESOURCES
     mailto: [log in to unmask]

    To unsubscribe from CHI-ANNOUNCEMENTS send an email to
     mailto:[log in to unmask]

    For further details of CHI lists see http://listserv.acm.org