Livestock grazing management and water quality protection : (state of the art reference document) /

Mode of access: Internet.

Living coastal resources : a coastal zone management technical assistance document /

Mode of access: Internet.

Records Management System: Indexing Standard, Document Standard, Technology Standard, Laboratory Configuration, 1997

Purpose of Records Management Sysytem indexing standards document is to develop indexing standards that will best support Iowa DOT's effort to build an agency-wide Records Management System

Nation & internation practices in decision support tools in road asset management

This document provides a review of international and national practices in investment decision support tools in road asset management. Efforts were concentrated on identifying analytic frameworks, evaluation methodologies and criteria adopted by current tools. Emphasis was also given to how current approaches support Triple Bottom Line decision-making. Benefit Cost Analysis and Multiple Criteria Analysis are principle methodologies in supporting decision-making in Road Asset Management. The complexity of the applications shows significant differences in international practices. There is continuing discussion amongst practitioners and researchers regarding to which one is more appropriate in supporting decision-making. It is suggested that the two approaches should be regarded as complementary instead of competitive means. Multiple Criteria Analysis may be particularly helpful in early stages of project development, say strategic planning. Benefit Cost Analysis is used most widely for project prioritisation and selecting the final project from amongst a set of alternatives. Benefit Cost Analysis approach is useful tool for investment decision-making from an economic perspective. An extension of the approach, which includes social and environmental externalities, is currently used in supporting Triple Bottom Line decision-making in the road sector. However, efforts should be given to several issues in the applications. First of all, there is a need to reach a degree of commonality on considering social and environmental externalities, which may be achieved by aggregating the best practices. At different decision-making level, the detail of consideration of the externalities should be different. It is intended to develop a generic framework to coordinate the range of existing practices. The standard framework will also be helpful in reducing double counting, which appears in some current practices. Cautions should also be given to the methods of determining the value of social and environmental externalities. A number of methods, such as market price, resource costs and Willingness to Pay, are found in the review. The use of unreasonable monetisation methods in some cases has discredited Benefit Cost Analysis in the eyes of decision makers and the public. Some social externalities, such as employment and regional economic impacts, are generally omitted in current practices. This is due to the lack of information and credible models. It may be appropriate to consider these externalities in qualitative forms in a Multiple Criteria Analysis. Consensus has been reached in considering noise and air pollution in international practices. However, Australia practices generally omitted these externalities. Equity is an important consideration in Road Asset Management. The considerations are either between regions, or social groups, such as income, age, gender, disable, etc. In current practice, there is not a well developed quantitative measure for equity issues. More research is needed to target this issue. Although Multiple Criteria Analysis has been used for decades, there is not a generally accepted framework in the choice of modelling methods and various externalities. The result is that different analysts are unlikely to reach consistent conclusions about a policy measure. In current practices, some favour using methods which are able to prioritise alternatives, such as Goal Programming, Goal Achievement Matrix, Analytic Hierarchy Process. The others just present various impacts to decision-makers to characterise the projects. Weighting and scoring system are critical in most Multiple Criteria Analysis. However, the processes of assessing weights and scores were criticised as highly arbitrary and subjective. It is essential that the process should be as transparent as possible. Obtaining weights and scores by consulting local communities is a common practice, but is likely to result in bias towards local interests. Interactive approach has the advantage in helping decision-makers elaborating their preferences. However, computation burden may result in lose of interests of decision-makers during the solution process of a large-scale problem, say a large state road network. Current practices tend to use cardinal or ordinal scales in measure in non-monetised externalities. Distorted valuations can occur where variables measured in physical units, are converted to scales. For example, decibels of noise converts to a scale of -4 to +4 with a linear transformation, the difference between 3 and 4 represents a far greater increase in discomfort to people than the increase from 0 to 1. It is suggested to assign different weights to individual score. Due to overlapped goals, the problem of double counting also appears in some of Multiple Criteria Analysis. The situation can be improved by carefully selecting and defining investment goals and criteria. Other issues, such as the treatment of time effect, incorporating risk and uncertainty, have been given scant attention in current practices. This report suggested establishing a common analytic framework to deal with these issues.

An exploration of knowledge management and intellectual capital in a nonprofit organisation context

In recent years, practitioners and researchers alike have turned their attention to knowledge management (KM) in order to increase organisational performance (OP). As a result, many different approaches and strategies have been investigated and suggested for how knowledge should be managed to make organisations more effective and efficient. However, most research has been undertaken in the for-profit sector, with only a few studies focusing on the benefits nonprofit organisations might gain by managing knowledge. This study broadly investigates the impact of knowledge management on the organisational performance of nonprofit organisations. Organisational performance can be evaluated through either financial or non-financial measurements. In order to evaluate knowledge management and organisational performance, non-financial measurements are argued to be more suitable given that knowledge is an intangible asset which often cannot be expressed through financial indicators. Non-financial measurement concepts of performance such as the balanced scorecard or the concept of Intellectual Capital (IC) are well accepted and used within the for-profit and nonprofit sectors to evaluate organisational performance. This study utilised the concept of IC as the method to evaluate KM and OP in the context of nonprofit organisations due to the close link between KM and IC: Indeed, KM is concerned with managing the KM processes of creating, storing, sharing and applying knowledge and the organisational KM infrastructure such as organisational culture or organisational structure to support these processes. On the other hand, IC measures the knowledge stocks in different ontological levels: at the individual level (human capital), at the group level (relational capital) and at the organisational level (structural capital). In other words, IC measures the value of the knowledge which has been managed through KM. As KM encompasses the different KM processes and the KM infrastructure facilitating these processes, previous research has investigated the relationship between KM infrastructure and KM processes. Organisational culture, organisational structure and the level of IT support have been identified as the main factors of the KM infrastructure influencing the KM processes of creating, storing, sharing and applying knowledge. Other research has focused on the link between KM and OP or organisational effectiveness. Based on existing literature, a theoretical model was developed to enable the investigation of the relation between KM (encompassing KM infrastructure and KM processes) and IC. The model assumes an association between KM infrastructure and KM processes, as well as an association between KM processes and the various levels of IC (human capital, structural capital and relational capital). As a result, five research questions (RQ) with respect to the various factors of the KM infrastructure as well as with respect to the relationship between KM infrastructure and IC were raised and included into the research model: RQ 1 Do nonprofit organisations which have a Hierarchy culture have a stronger IT support than nonprofit organisations which have an Adhocracy culture? RQ 2 Do nonprofit organisations which have a centralised organisational structure have a stronger IT support than nonprofit organisations which have decentralised organisational structure? RQ 3 Do nonprofit organisations which have a stronger IT support have a higher value of Human Capital than nonprofit organisations which have a less strong IT support? RQ 4 Do nonprofit organisations which have a stronger IT support have a higher value of Structural Capital than nonprofit organisations which have a less strong IT support? RQ 5 Do nonprofit organisations which have a stronger IT support have a higher value of Relational Capital than nonprofit organisations which have a less strong IT support? In order to investigate the research questions, measurements for IC were developed which were linked to the main KM processes. The final KM/IC model contained four items for evaluating human capital, five items for evaluating structural capital and four items for evaluating relational capital. The research questions were investigated through empirical research using a case study approach with the focus on two nonprofit organisations providing trade promotions services through local offices worldwide. Data for the investigation of the assumptions were collected via qualitative as well as quantitative research methods. The qualitative study included interviews with representatives of the two participating organisations as well as in-depth document research. The purpose of the qualitative study was to investigate the factors of the KM infrastructure (organisational culture, organisational structure, IT support) of the organisations and how these factors were related to each other. On the other hand, the quantitative study was carried out through an online-survey amongst staff of the various local offices. The purpose of the quantitative study was to investigate which impact the level of IT support, as the main instrument of the KM infrastructure, had on IC. Overall several key themes were found as a result of the study: • Knowledge Management and Intellectual Capital were complementary with each other, which should be expressed through measurements of IC based on KM processes. • The various factors of the KM infrastructure (organisational culture, organisational structure and level of IT support) are interdependent. • IT was a primary instrument through which the different KM processes (creating, storing, sharing and applying knowledge) were performed. • A high level of IT support was evident when participants reported higher level of IC (human capital, structural capital and relational capital). The study supported previous research in the field of KM and replicated the findings from other case studies in this area. The study also contributed to theory by placing the KM research within the nonprofit context and analysing the linkage between KM and IC. From the managerial perspective, the findings gave clear indications that would allow interested parties, such as nonprofit managers or consultants to understand more about the implications of KM on OP and to use this knowledge for implementing efficient and effective KM strategies within their organisations.

Towards a service portfolio management framework

Services in the form of business services or IT-enabled (Web) Services have become a corporate asset of high interest in striving towards the agile organisation. However, while the design and management of a single service is widely studied and well understood, little is known about how a set of services can be managed. This gap motivated this paper, in which we explore the concept of Service Portfolio Management. In particular, we propose a Service Portfolio Management Framework that explicates service portfolio goals, tasks, governance issues, methods and enablers. The Service Portfolio Management Framework is based upon a thorough analysis and consolidation of existing, well-established portfolio management approaches. From an academic point of view, the Service Portfolio Management Framework can be positioned as an extension of portfolio management conceptualisations in the area of service management. Based on the framework, possible directions for future research are provided. From a practical point of view, the Service Portfolio Management Framework provides an organisation with a novel approach to managing its emerging service portfolios.

Management of comorbidity

Comorbidity of substance use disorders and mental disorders is very common, and there is substantial heterogeneity within subgroups in terms of both their characteristics and the nature of causal relationships between the disorders. Assessment and management strategies need to deal with both the size of the problem across the community and its severe impact in some subgroups, including those with psychosis. At this stage, the research base from which we can derive recommendations is very narrow, but it does offer a foundation for preliminary conclusions. This chapter reviews the current evidence and makes some suggestions for assessment and for both psychological and pharmacological management.