Interpretation of Collaborative Decisions by Meta-metrics

Abstract

Knowledge is bound to person. It originates in persons and is used by persons. Knowledge can be based on data and information. It also represents a combination of classified experiences, values, context and expertise, which provides a framework for the evaluation of these experiences and information. Consolidated knowledge from multiple persons can, however, result in false outcomes, especially when values are transformed into metrics. Due to the occurring aggregation, particular information about personspecific differences in determining the overall assessment of a community is lost. Two similar assessments can be based on entirely different single evaluations, expertises or totalities. Hence, the assessment regarding their quality, balance and stability should be performed differently. Metrics about the initial data basis are necessary in order to provide interpretation aid. This paper introduces the meta-metrics for the interpretation of collaborative decision makings in communities of practice.