One view of information analysis, two visions of systematizing knowledge

organization (KO): A comparison of the indexing theories of

Paul Otlet and Julius Otto Kaiser

Thomas M. DousaGSLIS Research Showcase 2009

2009.04.06

Otlet’s and Kaiser’s shared view of information indexing

• Each and every document consists of a number of facts, data, and opinions (i.e., “information units”) that have been brought together in a specific intellectual configuration by the author.

• Information in documents, not the documents themselves, is what users are primarily interested in.

• The goal of information indexing is: (1) to analyze documents down to their constituent “information

units”; (2) to organize these units in such a way to make them maximally

available to potential users.

• Information indexing thus is “analytico-synthetic” in nature.

Organizing Information I: Classified Order (Otlet) vs. Alphabetical Order (Kaiser)

• Otlet • Information to be organized by means of a classification: in casu, the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) • Classified approach with UDC preferable because it -- (1) permits an “encyclopedic” arrangement of information that follows the “order of ideas”; -- (2) uses an internationally standardizable numeric notation

• Kaiser • Information to be organized by means of alphabetized file of index terms extracted from the source document and assigned to one of three term categories: “concretes”, “countries”, or “processes” • Alphabetical approach preferable because it -- (1) avoids unnecessary interpretation of terms and so minimizes semantic imprecision -- (2) uses a simple, widely understood ordering principle

Organizing Information II: Universal Systems (Otlet) vs. Local Systems (Kaiser)

• Otlet • The goal of KO is to organize information into a series of indexes for different knowledge domains which, coordinated by a universal classification such as the UDC, will together form a single “univer- sal encyclopedia” or “summa” of human knowledge. • KO systems must be internationally applicable. • Thus, KO systems, such as the UDC, should be universal in scope and, as much as possible, standardized in their application. • Kaiser • The goal of KO is to organize information for members of particular communities (in casu, business organizations) and any given in- dex should reflect the specific interests and purposes of the community for which it is designed. • Thus, KO systems should be “local” in scope and, apart from basic techniques, should not be standardized in their application.

Social and ideological reasons for differences between Kaiser’s and Otlet’s theories of KO

• Otlet • lawyer by training, bibliographer of law and social sciences by

profession, and initiator of “documentalist” movement • strongly influenced by Comtean ideal of science as engine of collective progress for Humanity • internationalist in outlook and builder of international institutions,

such as the Institut International de Bibliographie (IIB, later IID and FID)

• Kaiser • indexer in commercial, company, and technical libraries • strong proponent of an individualism characteristic of late 19th/ early 20th-century business culture