Re: [ontology-summit] Understanding the problem domain

[Ali Hashemi <ali@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Michael and Peter,

Michael - I certainly hope no one is taking un-sourced numbers at face value here! Thanks for the link to that seminar, it was very interesting.

Peter, here are a couple of possible sound bites and both an elevatorized + a 3-minutified pitch:

Objective: Conversation starter.
Sound bite: Ontology is critical for you to know the difference between what you think you know and what you really know.
================
Objective: Key take-away association
Sound bite: Ontology is vital in enabling an organization to deliver the right information to the right people at just the right time.

On the next two - I know Nicola prefers the term conceptualization over the phrase “assumptions about how...”, but I’m not sure it carries the same clear meaning for a business or lay audience. In my experience, many people come to the table with preconceptions as to what conceptualization means and it can become a digression from a the main message. Have others faced similar problems with other phrasings?

Elevator Pitch

Audience (+what audience knows): Organization has a vaguely semantic problem.  Organization may not frame their problem(s) in terms of ontology.
What you know: An organization that faces a problem where an ontology based solution can deliver value. They suffer from one of but not exhaustively, having difficulty with: retaining or reusing knowledge, internally connecting people, integrating new solutions, overwhelming complexity, disconnect between management and employee reality. It might not be obvious what specific technology solution is appropriate yet.
Objective: Communicate value that ontological analysis provides

Pitch: Every {unit in your organization} that processes information or has decision making capable carries with it assumptions about how the world works. Ontology makes these assumptions explicit and accessible, helping you strike that critical balance between achieving short term goals while planning for the long game - granting a decisive strategic advantage to your organization.

================

Thee Minute Pitch

Audience: Organization has a vaguely semantic problem. Organization may not frame their problem(s) in terms of ontology.
What you know:  An organization that faces a problem where an ontology based solution can deliver value.  They suffer from one of but not exhaustively, having difficulty with: retaining or reusing knowledge, internally connecting people, integrating new solutions, overwhelming complexity, disconnect between management and employee reality. It might not be obvious what specific technology solution is appropriate yet.
Objective: Communicate value that ontological analysis provides

Pitch: A vital problem facing every growing, changing organization is developing solutions that can adapt to new and dynamic environments, employees, technologies and market realities.  In any organization, each and every unit that collects or processes information or makes decisions, employs certain assumptions about how their (part) of the world works - or is important enough to know about.

Ontology based solutions makes these assumptions explicit and accessible across the organization. Ontological analysis and tools facilitate a streamlined integration of new market forces, new systems, new people - in effect any new assumptions. They provide a powerful framework to manage, update and evolve the high value components of responsive, agile organizations.

While the particular technology implementation for your organization depends on {your current commitments and available resources}; ontological analysis is critical in allowing you to plan for the long term while addressing current needs. It does so by identifying what parts of an organizations assumptions can provide a real benefit to the operation and delivery of (service / product / other) for ___, within an extensible, modular framework. With this understanding, you can effectively pick the right technology implementation to strike that balance between long and short term objectives.

================

Cheers,

Ali

On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Michael F Uschold <uschold@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Ali said:

"And half the
problem is in understanding the problem domain anyway"

Perhaps much more than half. See Michael Brodies comments in this excellent video of a panel discussion on industrial uptake of semantic technology.  He said you  need to spend much more time understanding the problem domain and how the technology can apply, than you spend on developing the technology itself.

http://videolectures.net/estc08_panel_steiu/

Michael 

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

Ali and All,

Given this input, and the useful dialog around it that we had during
the (Apr-7) Communique draft review session - ref.
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2011_04_07#nid2RUR
... and the conversation below that - can I interest you to roll that
up into an "elevator pitch" and post that input to:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2011_MakingTheCase_CommunityInput#nid2NFS

I extend this solicitation again to everyone who has been refining (or
helping the community refine) his/her message about "the case for
Ontology", we will be pointing people to those inputs ... so, please
please send them in NOW (before the end of day Friday)!

... feel free to send those Elevator Pitches and Sound Bites in, ASAP,
through the online survey form, post it to the wiki, or even email
them to me (if you want me to post them to the wiki for you.) - see:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2011_MakingTheCase_CommunityInput#nid2NFS

Thanks & regards.  =ppy
--


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ali Hashemi <ali@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 11:06 AM
Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] Ontology Summit 2011: Communique draft
review session - Thu 2011.04.07.
To: Ontology Summit 2011 discussion <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx>


Some comments about the take aways that Michael Uschold mentioned
(bullet points 1-7 & also 1-5a-b on the draft Communiqué).
Familiar Friend

I would like to propose an integral take away that might not be as
immediately concrete as those specified there, but would nonetheless
play an important role in the decision making process.

Specifically, I would want a reader to come away with the feeling that
an ontology "fits". It's not a new, foreign, idea that one would have
to expend a lot of energy to integrate to a particular socio-technical
system, but a natural outgrowth of whatever it was you were already
doing.

Sort of like "We've been doing ontology all along, but I never knew it".

===

Ontological Analysis vs Artifact

I would also like to suggest a clearer delineation between an ontology
artefact and the methodology and process of ontological analysis. I
think there is market just for the latter, even if it doesn't
necessarily result in a formal, computational ontology.

Namely, given the current state of adoption and most importantly,
comprehension in industry of ontology, it might not be possible to
demonstrate how an ontology artifact would necessarily lead to
immediate benefits. Indeed, as was pointed out in the just-completed
telecon, it is very difficult to consistently come up with a set of
generic value metrics to judge the success of a program. And half the
problem is in understanding the problem domain anyway. If a company is
unfamiliar with ontology, would they even be able to articulate their
problem clearly and map it to such metrics?

Alternatively, it should be possible how ontological analysis of the
business (organization) domain (process / subdomain / problem) can
help the business:

increase self-awareness
identify possible ways that an ontology artifact(s) can deliver value
develop a road map for a long term plan of incrementally deploying
semantic technologies

Yes, these are notoriously difficult ROI cases, that have to be
tailored to each particular context. But they are necessary stepping
stones / landmarks in any strategy.

To summarize and rephrase:

An additional key take away might be that - even if I am a business
that has no clear/concrete idea of how ontology might help me out
(especially as a particular type of technology solution -- should i go
with OWL? a data dictionary? a full-on ontology? what level of
reasoning do I really need, if at all?), I should at least come away
feeling that ontological analysis is absolutely necessary for any
possible solution. It is an essential component of my ability as a
manager or decision maker in my company to make an informed choice as
to how to go forward. And without such work, I might not know enough
about my problem domain from an ontology perspective to be able to
intelligently pick and choose the most relevant use caes.

The result of simply engaging an ontology-based analysis might then
suggest to start with a simple vocabulary or terminology, or to simply
enhance key components of a db here, or a best practices there. It
would come up with the value metrics itself. That is to say, no
immediate full scale commitment to any particular ontology artifact,
but a commitment to ontological analysis and modeling. This is a far
less expensive endeavor, and already sets the pre-sale for the next
one (if applicable).
Is this (un)clear?

Cheers,
Ali
--
www.reseed.ca
www.pinkarmy.org

(•`'·.¸(`'·.¸(•)¸.·'´)¸.·'´•) .,.,

_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2011/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2011
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/

--
Michael Uschold, PhD
   Senior Ontology Consultant, Semantic Arts

   LinkedIn: http://tr.im/limfu
   Skype, Twitter: UscholdM

--
www.reseed.ca
www.pinkarmy.org

(•`'·.¸(`'·.¸(•)¸.·'´)¸.·'´•) .,.,

_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/   
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2011/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2011  
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/     (01)