지식 공유의 파레토 비율 및 불평등 정도와 가상 지식 협업: 위키피디아 행위 데이터 분석|RISS 상세보기

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The Pareto principle, also known as the 80-20 rule, states that roughly 80% of the effects come from 20% of the causes for many events including natural phenomena. It has been recognized as a golden rule in business with a wide application of such discovery like 20 percent of customers resulting in 80 percent of total sales. On the other hand, the Long Tail theory, pointing out that “the trivial many” produces more value than “the vital few,” has gained popularity in recent times with a tremendous reduction of distribution and inventory costs through the development of ICT(Information and Communication Technology). This study started with a view to illuminating how these two primary business paradigms－Pareto principle and Long Tail theory－relates to the success of virtual knowledge collaboration. The importance of virtual knowledge collaboration is soaring in this era of globalization and virtualization transcending geographical and temporal constraints. Many previous studies on knowledge sharing have focused on the factors to affect knowledge sharing, seeking to boost individual knowledge sharing and resolve the social dilemma caused from the fact that rational individuals are likely to rather consume than contribute knowledge. Knowledge collaboration can be defined as the creation of knowledge by not only sharing knowledge, but also by transforming and integrating such knowledge. In this perspective of knowledge collaboration, the relative distribution of knowledge sharing among participants can count as much as the absolute amounts of individual knowledge sharing. In particular, whether the more contribution of the upper 20 percent of participants in knowledge sharing will enhance the efficiency of overall knowledge collaboration is an issue of interest. This study deals with the effect of this sort of knowledge sharing distribution on the efficiency of knowledge collaboration and is extended to reflect the work characteristics. All analyses were conducted based on actual data instead of self-reported questi onnaire surveys. More specifically, we analyzed the collaborative behaviors of editors of 2,978 English Wikipedia featured articles, which are the best quality grade of articles in English Wikipedia. We adopted Pareto ratio, the ratio of the number of knowledge contribution of the upper 20 percent of participants to the total number of knowledge contribution made by the total participants of an article group, to examine the effect of Pareto principle. In addition, Gini coefficient, which represents the inequality of income among a group of people, was applied to reveal the effect of inequality of knowledge contribution. Hypotheses were set up based on the assumption that the higher ratio of knowledge contribution by more highly motivated participants will lead to the higher collaboration efficiency, but if the ratio gets too high, the collaboration efficiency will be exacerbated because overall informational diversity is threatened and knowledge contribution of less motivated participants is intimidated. Cox egression models were formulated for each of the focal variables－Pareto ratio and Gini coefficient－with seven control variables such as the number of editors involved in an article, the average time length between successive edits of an article, the number of sections a featured article has, etc. The dependent variable of the Cox models is the time spent from article initiation to promotion to the featured article level, indicating the efficiency of knowledge collaboration. To examine whether the effects of the focal variables vary depending on the characteristics of a group task, we classified 2,978 featured articles into two categories: Academic and Non-academic. Academic articles refer to at least one paper published at an SCI, SSCI, A&HCI, or SCIE journal. We assumed that academic articles are more complex, entail more information processing and problem solving, and thus require more skill variety and expert

번역하기

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 O’Reilly III, "Work Group Demography, Social Integration, and Turnover" 34 (34): 21-37, 1989

2 Wasko, M., "Why Should I Share? Examining Social Capital and Knowledge Contribution in Electronic Networks of Practice" 29 (29): 35-57, 2005

3 Jehn, K. A., "Why Differences Make a Difference: A Field Study of Diversity, Conflict, and Performance in Workgroups" 44 (44): 741-763, 1999

4 Bantel, K. A., "Top Management and Innovations in Banking:Does the Composition of the Top Team Make a Difference?" 10 (10): 107-124, 1989

5 Davenport, T. H., "Thinking for a Living: How to Get Better Performance and Results from Knowledge Workers" Business School Press 2006

6 Morgeson, F. P., "The Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and Validating Comprehensive Measure for Assessing Job Design and the Nature of Work" 91 (91): 1321-1339, 2006

7 Short, J., "The Social Psychology of Telecommunications" John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 1976

8 Simon, H. A., "The New Science of Management Decision" Harper & Brothers Publishers 1960

9 Anderson, C, "The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business is Selling Less of More" Hyperion 2006

10 Anderson, C., "The Long Tail, Wired"