Articles by Month: January 2006

List of features of models

Idiagram has published an excellent list of features that all conceptual models should share. To quote:

Broadly speaking we use the term 'model' to refer to any structured knowledge that accurately reflects and enables us to make sense of the world. Models exist both internally as 'mental models' and externally as 'cognitive artifacts'. Cognitive artifacts can take many forms: written texts, spoken stories, graphs, diagrams, pictures, videos, spreadsheets, equations, computer-simulations, etc. While these different kinds of models vary greatly in their form and function, they all share certain desirable properties.

[Thanks to Mark Schenk.]

Posted by jamesr at 09:54 AM | Permalink
Categories: Knowledge management

Formulaic design and usability

Michael Andrews has written an article exploring the role of usability in formulaic design, and where it fits in non-formulaic projects. To quote:

Let's arbitrarily divide user centered designs into two types: formulaic designs, and non-formulaic ones. Formulaic designs are the stock and trade of web agencies designing for the public -- things like news sites and online catalogs. They are ubiquitous, and generally all look and work the same, regardless of whose site it is. Generally people involved in such projects have a good idea about user needs even prior to starting: they are folks just like us, after all, and we have already talked to countless people like them for other similar projects. When we design for formulaic projects, we already have a good grasp of the solutions available to us. Designing an online shopping cart is not rocket science, it has been done countless times, users have expectations how they operate, and the work is mostly a matter of polishing the details.

Posted by jamesr at 09:54 AM | Permalink
Categories: Usability & user-centered design

Taking a content inventory

Donna Maurer writes some practical tips on taking a content inventory. To quote:

I've spent much of the past 2 weeks working on a content inventory. As a technique, it is pretty straightforward and well documented (if you're not familiar, read: Doing a Content Inventory or any of my other posts in this category). But I've done this many times and have some extra tips.

Posted by jamesr at 03:04 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture

Evaluating the usability of search forms using eyetracking: a practical approach

Matteo Penzo reports on the results of eyetracking the use of search forms. To quote:

We held three different rounds of test sessions. In the sessions, each individual user evaluated the user interfaces we were testing in random order. During the first round of testing, we tested the usability of search forms. Each session started with a training task, through which our testers demonstrated the task that the user would repeat throughout the test session, using a form that was well known to all the users: Google™ search. Then, the user used other search forms to perform this task: locate the search box, then search for eye. The task ended when the user clicked the submit button.

Posted by jamesr at 12:17 PM | Permalink
Categories: Usability & user-centered design

Content management problems and open source solutions

Seth Gottlieb has written an article that compares open-source content management systems. To quote:

The open source community has produced a number of useful, high quality content management systems which presents an opportunity to deliver tailored content management solutions without the high licensing or management fees associated with commercially-licensed or hosted software. However, the sheer number of open source CMS projects and the ineffectualness of traditional commercial software selection techniques can make the task of finding the right open source software an intimidating challenge. The strategy of using feature matrices is particularly ill-suited to open source software selection. A more practical approach is to match your needs to a common business problem that others have solved using open source software and engage with the community to learn about their experiences in implementing the solution. Doing so will take advantage of the unique aspects of open source software: the openness of the user community and the transparency of the development process.

Posted by jamesr at 01:59 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management

Health inspectors and corporate intranets

Jeremiah Owyang has written an article that explores the intranet as a reflection of the company it belongs to. To quote:

"An Intranet is a good reflection of the inner workings and 'Corporate DNA' of a Company". Next time you take a look at your Corporate Intranet at your work, think about it, the website tells a story on how the company is structured, it’s focus, and how employees interact.

Posted by jamesr at 09:34 AM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets

The elements of a design pattern

Jared Spool has written an article on design patterns for interfaces. To quote:

Design teams are discovering that a well-built design pattern library makes the user interface development process substantially easier. A quality library means team members have the information they need at their fingertips. Choosing usable components that work smoothly for users becomes the developer's path of least resistance. Innovation, while not prohibited, is reserved for those times when it's really necessary, allowing the team to leverage the work already done by others.

Posted by jamesr at 11:51 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture, Usability & user-centered design

Grand enterprise projects: why are we wasting our time?

The need for improvements in information management systems and practices within organisations is great. Spend half a day talking with a random selection of staff, and the list of desirable fixes and enhancements will be lengthy.

Whether it is the need to log into three different applications to complete a single task, or the filling out of a poorly-designed paper form where an electronic one would work better. Staff are struggling to do their jobs, and we are not providing them with good tools or systems to help in their day-to-day tasks.

So my question is: why are we wasting our time with grand "enterprise" projects when there are so many more immediate problems to be fixed?

Enterprise projects

Within organisations at present, there is a great interest in pursuing a range of "enterprise" projects relating to information management. These projects may include:

• Purchasing an "enterprise portal" to provide a single interface for all systems and data sources.
• Rolling out an organisation-wide document or records management systems.
• Pursuing the goals of "enterprise content management", such as the integration of web content management, document management and records management.
• Deploying "enterprise search" solutions to provide a single search across many different business systems.
• Developing all-inclusive "information management strategies", which offer a complete architectural model for all systems.
• Implementing a new IT architecture, with the goal of reducing the number of applications within the organisation.
• Developing corporate taxonomies (or even ontologies).
• Developing an organisation-wide knowledge management strategy.
• Focusing on enabling "knowledge sharing" across all areas of the organisation.

These projects have many things in common. They all can cost upwards of a million dollars (or more). Where there is technology involved, it will typically take a year (or more) to select a product. Another year will then be needed to implement the core of the system, to provide the platform for business-specific solutions.

So after 1-2 years of work and a lot of money and resources, what has been delivered? Beyond a range of potential improvements to back-office IT systems and processes, what are the direct benefits for the organisation?

In many cases, it is only after these huge projects have worked their way through the initial phases of selection and deployment that actual business problems can be solved. And this is where everything can become unstuck.

Let's face it: many of these systems and projects will never work. The track record for "enterprise" projects is not good, with many failing to deliver the much-hyped benefits. In many cases, these same solutions are quietly "rolled out" several years later.

In the meantime, these projects have consumed most of the energy within the organisation, and staff are still left waiting for their much-needed solutions and improvements. Quite rightly, there is much cynicism amongst general staff regarding these projects.

Practical improvements

These grand projects come and go to match the passing fads of the information management industry as a whole. And yet, after many years of work and countless projects, have the tools, processes and environments provided for general staff improved much?

Do we really need huge projects in the first place?

There are no shortage of business problems to be solved and improvements to be made. Instead of trying to eat the elephant whole, perhaps the better way is to take one bite at a time?

Individual business units are not well-placed to solve many business problems. A centralised team of skilled (and resourced) project staff can do much to quickly develop small but useful solutions. Running (or facilitating) these projects centrally ensures they are done in a coordinated way, rather than the usual mess of fragmented and poorly-designed solutions.

This is not to say that the bigger picture is forgotten, quite the opposite. While individual activities are always focused on immediate needs, consideration is given to longer-term objectives. This influences the selection of the projects, the technology used, and the points of integration into other systems.

Instead of setting in motion an enterprise project that will take 12-18 months to deliver the first benefits, why not start by improving leave applications by doing some point-to-point integration between HR and IT systems? Or replacing some PDF forms with electronic equivalents? Or improving the search tools for the call centre staff?

Lessons learnt from these individual projects then help to inform more strategic plans, as well as building up vital expertise and experience within the organisation. Each of these "quick wins" delivers real (and measurable) benefits, as well as demonstrating the value of the overall programme of work. Each small success enables ever-larger projects to be tackled.

Summary

There is so much that can be done to improve the daily work of staff throughout the organisation. The technology we have at our disposal is powerful and effective. Yet we do not seem to be putting this technology into practice.

Instead, we are spending most of our time (and money) developing grand strategic plans, producing elegant diagrams, and deploying huge enterprise software solutions. This is despite the consistent experience across organisations that few measurable benefits are delivered by these activities.

So this is a call to arms: let's start solving the real (and immediate) problems of staff, by delivering practical technology solutions that work. We should keep our eye on the bigger picture, practice good planning and project management, but fundamentally, we should deliver real improvements. We have the technology, now we just need the will to do the work that will make a difference.

Posted by jamesr at 11:29 AM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, Information management

Determining link order on intranet portals

Jared Spool has written a small blog entry on determining link order on intranet portals. To quote:

Several folks have asked what techniques we've used to determine the ideal order of links. We've had good success on intranets with a rating system. Using the use cases/tasks associated with each link, we ask users to rate them on two scales.

Posted by jamesr at 11:23 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture, Intranets

Intranet workshop calendar (Australia)

We've just finalised our workshop calendar for the first half of the year, and we'll be visiting Canberra, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth. Dates as follows:

Posted by jamesr at 11:08 AM | Permalink
Categories:

Content management questions (Kuala Lumpur)

I'm currently running a 2-day web content management workshop in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. It's packed, with 29 participants, so clearly there's a lot of interest! For the record, here are the (unedited) questions of the participants:

• How to ensure the CMS is effective?
• Skillsets required?
• Search on the published site?
• Do we need a CMS?
• Limitations of CMS re: complex content?
• How does a CMS fit into many existing systems?
• CMS security vulnerabilities?
• Relationship between content management and document management?
• People issues?
• Automation of content updates?
• Enterprise portal versus web CMS?
• ROI?
• Taxonomies?
• Same CMS for web and intranet?
• Ongoing need for technical skills and maintenance?
• How to choose a CMS?
• How to specify requirements?
• Who will operate the CMS?
• How to justify to management?
• Integration issues?
• Ready-made versus tailored CMS?
• Common problems encountered?
• Timelines?
• Additional hardware required?

Posted by jamesr at 07:40 PM | Permalink
Categories: Area Health Service project, Book & product reviews, Conferences & presentations, Content management, Content management, Design & usability guidelines, Document & records management, E-learning, Information architecture, Information management, Interface design, Intranets, James' articles, Knowledge management, Metrics & ROI, Search tools, Usability & user-centered design, Web development, Weblogs, XML

Folksonomies: tidying up tags?

Marieke Guy and Emma Tonkin have written an article that looks at what makes folksonomies work. To quote:

In this article we look at what makes folksonomies work. We agree with the premise that tags are no replacement for formal systems, but we see this as being the core quality that makes folksonomy tagging so useful. We begin by looking at the issue of "sloppy tags", a problem to which critics of folksonomies are keen to allude, and ask if there are ways the folksonomy community could offset such problems and create systems that are conducive to searching, sorting and classifying. We then go on to question this "tidying up" approach and its underlying assumptions, highlighting issues surrounding removal of low-quality, redundant or nonsense metadata, and the potential risks of tidying too neatly and thereby losing the very openness that has made folksonomies so popular.

[Thanks to InfoDesign.]

Posted by jamesr at 06:53 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture

Content migration: making it successful

Kassia Krozser has written an article on content migration, including a range of practical suggestions and tips. To quote:

In the real world, we all go into content migrations with high hopes and solid plans. Depending on the size of the site and the culture of the organization, you can expect delays, misunderstandings, and more than one last-minute "uh oh". There is a lot of good advice relating to managing the migration portion of a CMS project, and I've linked to some favorites below. In the meantime, here's my short strategic plan

Posted by jamesr at 06:42 PM | Permalink
Categories:

Intranet questions (Brunei)

I'm currently running a 2-day intranet strategy and design workshop in Brunei. Out of interest, here are the (unedited) questions from participants:

• How do we convince users to use the intranet?
• How to integrate content and applications?
• Security?
• How to improve intranet access speed?
• Publishing policies (confidentiality, etc)?
• How to verify the intranet design is correct?
• IP rights?
• How achieve it all?
• Intranet governance?
• Who should "own" the intranet?
• Justifying cost?
• Skillsets required?
• Minimum size of intranet teams?
• Interoperability?
• Publishing constraints (pictures, etc)?

Posted by jamesr at 09:03 PM | Permalink
Categories: Area Health Service project, Book & product reviews, Conferences & presentations, Content management, Design & usability guidelines, Document & records management, E-learning, Information architecture, Information management, Interface design, Intranets, Intranets, James' articles, Knowledge management, Metrics & ROI, Search tools, Usability & user-centered design, Web development, Weblogs, XML

First CM Pros Meeting in Sydney (Australia)

For those in Sydney with an interest in content management systems. If you are attending please RSVP to David Warwick (details below).

You are also welcome to add yourself to the CM Pros Australian mailing list, to hear about future events.

Full details:

DATE | Thursday 23 February 2006
TIME | 6.00PM to 8.00PM
VENUE | Sydney Mechanics' School of Arts - 280 Pitt Street (near Bathurst Street), Sydney NSW 2000
COST | FREE
SPEAKER | James Robertson
TOPIC | Australian CMS marketplace
RSVP | david at komodocms.com

Please attend if you can to support the formation of the CM Professionals Australia Community in Sydney and kick-start the 2006 series of CM Pros group meetings. The aims for the evening are to meet each other, hear renowned Content Management Expert and CM Pros Australia Community Co-Chair – James Robertson – give us an overview on the Australian CMS landscape and establish a format and calendar of meetings for Sydney. For those who can stay on after 8.00PM, we will retire to a nearby venue for a few drinks and an opportunity for open discussion on CM Pros, Content Management and related topics of interest.

Peter Meyer, Managing Director of Elkera and nominee for the international CM Pros Board, has kindly sponsored and organized this meeting and we also thank Sydney co-chair James Robertson for accepting the role of inaugural guest speaker. Please help us make this a start to remember. If you know that you are able to attend, please send me an email so that we can manage venue space and catering.

Posted by jamesr at 08:22 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management

Launch of Rosenfeld Media

Lou Rosenfeld has announced the launch of Rosenfeld Media, a new publishing house devoted to releasing titles on usability, information architecture and the like. To quote:

I've been planning Rosenfeld Media for about five months, and blogged the news of its impending arrival some time ago. But launching the RM site makes everything feel real, permanent, and somehow "official". Hello world!

Disclosure: I'm not in any way related to Rosenfeld Media, I just think it's cool when someone is passionate enough about a discipline to setup an entirely new publishing house...

Posted by jamesr at 07:48 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture, Usability & user-centered design

Training intranet content providers

Nick Besseling has written an article on training intranet content authors. To quote:

With the increasing implementation of distributed publishing throughout organisations there is an increasing need to train content providers to help develop a more consistent approach and style for their online content, not just train people on how to use the software. While there are many agencies that provide specialised 'Writing for online' workshops it is possible to develop an effective training programme (and I believe in-house provides far longer lasting benefits).

Posted by jamesr at 07:40 PM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets

Site maps and site indexes, revisited

Jared Spool has posted another article on the value of site maps. To quote:

Before the holidays, I generated blogosphere fervor when I mentioned I think it's a potential waste of valuable development resources to construct and maintain site maps and site indexes. Several people left excellent comments which I never had the chance to address until now, so let me see if I can clarify my thinking.

Posted by jamesr at 09:49 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture

The death of enterprise software

Joe Lamantia has written two interesting blog posts on the death of enterprise software.

The first post looks at increased competition from smaller players in the market. To quote:

For enterprise software, I think organizations will turn away from monolithic and expensive systems with terrible user experiences -- and correspondingly low levels of satisfaction, quality, and efficacy -- as the best means of meeting business needs, and shift to a mixed palette of semantically integrated capabilities or services delivered via the Internet. These capabilities will originate from diverse vendors or providers, and expose customized sets of functionality and information specific to the individual enterprise. Staff will access and encounter these capabilities via a multiplicity of channels and user experiences; dashboard or portal style aggregators, RIA rich internet applications, mobile devices, interfaces for RSS and other micro-content formats.

His second post examines the very poor user experience in most enterprise software. To quote:

It's no surprise then that 'enterprise software' as it is installed and configured in many large corporations is generally massive, anonymous, byzantine in structure and workings, indifferent or hostile to individual needs, offensively neutured in all aspects of it's user experience, and often changed arbitrarily to align with a power calculus determined by a select few who operate at great remove from the majority of the people who use the environment on a daily basis. After all, that is the nature of communication in many large (and quite a few small and medium sized) corporations.

Coincidentally, I've just written an article on the increasing gap between software in the broader market and that within organisations. I also wrote a post complaining about the lack of innovation in enterprise software. There's no doubt about it, something has to change, and the faster the better!

Posted by jamesr at 06:30 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, Information management

Designing user experiences for applications versus information resources on the web

Leo Frishberg has written an article on designing for applications versus websites. To quote:

The relatively recent adoption of user-focused design practices by the Web design and development community -- including personas, participatory design, paper prototyping, and the like -- highlights important distinctions between the user experiences of desktop applications and those of information spaces. With the growing desire for usable Web applications, these distinctions become more topical and important to understand. Though the process of designing and creating application and information space user experiences for the Web is virtually the same -- even if the deliverable design documents may differ -- their user experiences are fundamentally and profoundly different. For designers, business analysts, marketing consultants, and others who are sincerely interested in delivering the best user experiences online, understanding these distinctions can reduce the cost of design and improve the likelihood of user acceptance.

Posted by jamesr at 07:46 AM | Permalink
Categories: Usability & user-centered design

Business and IT must work together to manage new "web 2.0" tools

Dennis D. McDonald and Jeremiah Owyang have written an article on bringing the business and IT together, when addressing new (web 2.0) technologies. To quote:

Significant opportunities to meet market and customer needs are emerging as corporations harness the next generation of "Web 2.0" tools and applications. Many business units recognize this and want to move quickly. But are corporate I.T. (Information Technology) departments ready -- and willing -- to provide the needed support?

Posted by jamesr at 07:40 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, Intranets

Plans for 2006

2005 was an incredibly busy year, and I'm expecting 2006 to be much the same (but hopefully not more so!). Some other thoughts and plans for the year ahead:

• We'll continue to grow, further building the consulting team (we're still looking for new consultants).
• I'm looking forward to even broader travels (see my travels for 2005). Getting out to Europe and the US last year was great, most of all chatting with a pile of interesting folk including Tony Byrne, Martin White, Jane McConnell, Lisa Welchman, Janus Boye, Erik Hartmann, Shiv Singh, Lukas Karrer, and Samantha Starmer (apologies to those I've missed!).
• Already, I'm booked into run a pre-conference workshop at the IA Summit in Vancouver, and hope to be back in both the US and UK for events.
• Watch this space for the publication of more reports and resources. The first to be released will be a brand-new "Improving Intranet Search" report, which I'm putting the finishing touches to, and it will be out in the next month. We've then got a pile of ideas for further reports and products beyond that...
• We've organised workshops throughout Australia, which is going to be good fun. We're also planning on bringing out a number of international speakers this year (we're already talking with two excellent presenters, and hope to have details finalised with them in the next few weeks).
• Most of all, we're planning to keep having fun! We love what we do, and we plan to keep thinking and working hard throughout 2006...

Posted by jamesr at 12:16 PM | Permalink
Categories:

Successful employee yellow pages

Toby Ward has written a blog entry on intranet yellow pages. To quote:

Employee yellow page directories continue to be one of the few killer intranet applications. I've not come across an intranet or portal (that is undertaking proper log analysis metrics) where the directory isn’t in the top three most visited pages or intranet sections.

(This is something that I've discussed in great length in our Staff Directories report, which looks not just at the "yellow pages" capability, but more broadly at what makes a great online phone directory.)

Posted by jamesr at 11:51 AM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets

My travels for 2005

Taking the lead from Norman Walsh, I thought I would also visually represent my travels for 2005. Of course, this is a little more challenging when they involve the entire globe! Google Earth seemed like the simplest way of creating these maps, so without further comment:

Posted by jamesr at 09:39 AM | Permalink
Categories:

Top 5 New Year wishes of an intranet consultant

Toby Ward has written a blog entry listing his 5 New Year intranet wishes. To quote:

A corporation is not a democracy. Corporations, including not-for-profit corporations and government agencies and ministries, are run from the top down. Some corporations are more democratic than others and rule with a more collaborative environment than the traditional chain-of-command control structure, but all corporations are run from the top. As such, your intranet’s value will be severely limited without the support from senior management.

Posted by jamesr at 08:12 AM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets

Information management as a unified discipline

Patrick Cormier has written an excellent article on integrated information management, outlining the many different facets involved. To quote:

Until quite recently, Information Management (IM) practitioners have practiced their craft in isolation. Typical stereotypes and perceptions often portrayed records managers belonging to the basement, IT specialists in high paced I can do anything settings, Librarians in I go on managing my collections and serials mindsets and business users in why does IT not solve my problems as expected exasperations. This era is coming to an end. Why? The commoditization of IT, the increasing pressure to achieve better cost-efficiency and higher management expectations are forcing IM to reorganize itself into a coherent field of practice. IM is becoming more "unified" or "integrated".

Posted by jamesr at 09:52 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information management

Your blog, your name

Regular readers would be aware that a lot of my posts are links to interesting articles, resources, and commonly, blog posts. I confess: I do this primarily for my own benefit, so I can find these resources again later when I need them. I hope these posts are also of some use to others...

But now to a common point of frustration: all too often when I go to link to a blog entry, I struggle to find the name of the author. You'd think this would be straightforward, but it isn't so. I hunt through the "about me" page, I carefully examine the footer of each post, I examine the home page of the site. Nothing other than a username!

So my advice for everyone with a blog: make sure your name is clearly visible throughout your blog. Ideally, this should be listed on the sidebar of every page, perhaps even with a photograph and a brief bio. After all, a blog is supposed to be the voice of its author...

Take the 60 seconds test: can you find your name on your own blog? Your time starts now!

Posted by jamesr at 09:20 AM | Permalink
Categories: Weblogs

SME's and distributed authoring

Lisa Welchman discusses approaches for managing distributed authoring, focusing on the challenges of content quality, currency and accuracy. To quote:

I'm a firm believer in distributed web authoring and all that, but you have to be sure that your subject matter experts are web-ready. Many subject matter experts know a lot but couldn't write their way out of an alphabet test. Particularly when it comes to writing for the Web. Have you been copy editing their work for them before posting it to the site? Making bulleted lists out of long-winded paragraphs? You'll want to take steps to ensure that the quality stays high once you do the hand off.

Posted by jamesr at 09:08 AM | Permalink
Categories: Content management

Uptake of tagging

Coelomic has written a blog post discussing some of the challenges with tagging that may restrict it to an "early adopter" phenonominon. To quote:

Here in the following paragraphs I shall try and put forth an argument why the concept of “tagging” will remain the bastion of the early adopters.Though very interesting, it will remain just that and not help us break new ground in bringing order to the web or analyze its content in a more efficient manner.

[Thanks to Amy Gahran.]

Posted by jamesr at 08:47 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture