Articles by Category: Information management

Enhancing dashboard value and user experience

Joe Lamantia has published the fifth article in his series on dashboards and portals. To quote:

Portals gather and present content from a wide variety of sources, making the assembled items and streams more valuable for users by reducing the costs of content discovery and acquisition. By placing diverse content into close proximity, specialized forms of portals, such as the dashboard, support knowledge workers in creative and interpretive activities including synthesis, strategy formulation, decision making, collaboration, knowledge production, and multi-dimensional analysis.

Posted by jamesr at 10:40 AM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, Information architecture, Information management

Searching more is not always better

The rise of enterprise search has put an increasing focus on searching ever broader collections of content and documents within organisations.

While enterprise search projects generally start with simple intranet search, attention quickly moves to searching document management systems, collaboration tools, business systems and fileshares.

Underpinning this work is the belief (or hope) that business value will be delivered to users by deploying a more extensive search tool.

Unfortunately it is often the case that searching more is not better than searching less.

This briefing will look at some of the challenges involved in implementing enterprise search, and provide practical tips on how to proceed.

Relevance and value

The fundamental goal of any search tool is to provide users with useful and relevant search results.

Within the enterprise, this means finding valuable information across the many different repositories, sources and systems.

The difficulty is that increasing the amount of information being searched almost always reduces the relevance of search results. Once called the 'Altavista effect', this was seen in the millions of hits generated for any set of terms entered into that search engine.

This is equally significant within an enterprise, and the challenge is to maintain (or improve) relevance as the volume of information grows.

Consideration also needs to be given to user needs and expectations. What types of queries are being entered into the enterprise search, and what sorts of results are expected? Gaining a deeper understanding of these questions helps to shed light on what to search, and how.

[CM Briefing 2008-05, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 08:34 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, Intranets, James' articles, Search tools

Compliance is a dirty word

Alan Pelz-Sharpe has written about the issues with compliance. To quote:

If there is one word I hate to hear used in this industry it's the word compliance.

To me it's like fingernails down a blackboard, and frankly if I never hear it used again then I would be a happy man. Of course I have to endure the word in virtually every article and vendor press release I read. I don't like the word because it is a blanket term that used without context is totally meaningless, yet it's a word (much like governance) that sounds impressive and few people in the room will admit that they don't really understand it. Well let me be among the first to point out the the Compliance Emperor often has no clothes.

Posted by jamesr at 10:00 AM | Permalink
Categories: Document & records management, Information management, Intranets

Questions to ask before replacing corporate email

Dennis McDonald has written an article on replacing corporate email. To quote:

Email is not necessarily a good collaboration tool. This document discusses some of the questions you can ask about your organization’s current use of email and how improvements can be made. Also discussed is email’s impact on the adoption of new tools more suited to supporting workgroups and collaboration such as blogs, wikis, and groupsites for sharing information about people and projects.

Posted by jamesr at 11:27 AM | Permalink
Categories: Enterprise 2.0, Information management, Intranets

Clean up your LDAP or Active Directory

A lot of intranet and portal projects aim to deliver functionality related to personalisation or customisation.

This may involve tailoring information based on staff role, delivering news relevant for specific offices, or limiting access to information based on seniority.

Any of these capabilities requires the system to know who staff are, the business unit they belong to, and where they sit in the real world.

Unfortunately, too many of these projects run aground before they start because a key piece of IT infrastructure has not been correctly put in place.

LDAP and Active Directory

Sitting invisibly behind the scenes in organisations is the 'authentication' platform run by IT. In simple terms, this contains the usernames and passwords staff use when they log on to their PCs each morning.

Over time, these details have been migrated into one of two standards: LDAP (an open industry standard) or Active Directory (the Microsoft variant of the same thing).

These expanded 'directory services' have the ability to store much more than just names and passwords. If configured to do so, they can contain all the information that is in the internal phone directory or staff directory, including job titles, business unit names, locations and more.

The most obvious benefit to come from putting in place these new standards is the progressive move towards 'single sign-on', allowing one username and password to be used across a wide range of corporate systems.

Crucially for intranet and portal projects, LDAP or Active Directory is also the source of the information needed to drive personalisation and customisation.

[CM Briefing 2008-03, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 12:08 AM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, Information management, Intranets, James' articles

Clarify. Simplify. Implement.

Nathan Wallace has written about his clarify - simplify - implement approach to information management. To quote:

Relentlessly question, review and challenge the processes and solution being developed. Drive for consistency. Search for well-known models or applications you can copy. Don't be afraid to change basic assumptions, where simplicity can be enhanced. Always challenge the value of edge cases and try to eradicate them. Work hard to remove every single process, click, page view, icon, etc until you have something so simple that it feels right to everyone involved. (This is the primary value adding activity for IT.)

Read this post several times, as it contains important insight. Nathan is a CIO with a deep technical background and a thoughtful approach to everything that he does. In these three words, he outlines a radically different approach to designing and deploying enterprise solutions. Great stuff!

Posted by jamesr at 07:01 AM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, Enterprise 2.0, Information management

Innovative Information Management Planning (Sydney, April 2)

Cairo's Innovative Information Management Planning workshop is a truly unique event, giving a fresh approach to planning information projects. We've just lined up a date in Sydney on 2 April, and this is not far off (the early-bird date closes on 2 March). At a glance:

To be successful, information management initiatives must quickly become valuable to the business, delivering tangible and visible benefits. This can be challenging in complex organisational environments with many hurdles to overcome.

Cairo Walker shares her on-the-ground experience working with some of Australasia's most prominent private and public sector organisation's information management strategies, plans and initiatives. Don't miss this opportunity to hear Cairo share her thoughts and insights on making information management work.

[Full workshop details]

Posted by jamesr at 11:10 AM | Permalink
Categories: Conferences & presentations, Information management

Enterprise 2.0 Executive Forum 2008 (Sydney, February)

Ross Dawson of Future Exploration Network will be hosting the Enterprise 2.0 Executive Forum 2008 on February 19 in Sydney. Enterprise 2.0 is an important topic for many organisations, but the challenge is finding how best to deploy these new technologies and ideas.

Enterprise 2.0 Executive Forum will provide a pragmatic overview of how Web 2.0 and social media technologies are being applied inside the enterprise to create business value. This unique half-day event will be centred on case studies of how leading Australian and global organisations have benefited from these technologies, and the key factors in successful implementation.

Ross Dawson is a leading thinking in this space and a truly compelling presenter. He has also assembled a stellar cast of thought-leaders and implementers:

• David Backley, Chief Technology Officer, Westpac Banking Corporation
• Peter Evans-Greenwood, Chief Technology Officer, Capgemini Australia
• Brian Haverty, Editorial Director, CNET Networks Australia
• Andrew McAfee, Associate Professor, Harvard Business School
• Sheryle Moon, Chief Executive Officer, Australian Information Industry Association
• Victor Rodrigues, Software Development Manager, Cochlear
• Euan Semple, Former Head of Knowledge Management, BBC
• Jonathan Stern, Business Unit Executive, Lotus Software, Australia and New Zealand

Step Two Designs is a supporter of this event, and I can personally recommend it to anyone looking to explore these ideas. Not to be missed!

[Full event details]

Posted by jamesr at 02:33 PM | Permalink
Categories: Conferences & presentations, Enterprise 2.0, Information management, Intranets

Enterprise intranet predictions for 2008

Toby Ward writes his intranet predictions for 2008. To quote:

Your intranet home page is poorly designed and far too busy (well, for most). Employees are screaming for simpler home pages, with fewer links, more white space, and less color. Time and time again when I test different home page designs and concepts in employee focus groups the most simple designs test highest.

Posted by jamesr at 08:00 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, Intranets

It's nice to have friends

It's nice to have friends. Over the years, we've met a lot of people at conferences and events, and have steady readers of the articles we publish. We've also worked with a lot of organisations, or have had conversations via emails.

The connections we build at conferences, however, can be lost at the end of the events. While many teams read our articles, this readership is largely invisible and unconnected.

So we've created a Friends of Step Two Facebook group. Everyone is welcome, and this is for those interested in intranets, information management, usability or information architecture.

We'll publish links to our regularly monthly articles, and well as cool stuff like the upcoming video interviews of the Intranet Innovation Awards winners.

Beyond that, the group is entirely open. Everyone is welcome to post links, photos and videos. Let's start a conversation, we're all friendly people...

Posted by jamesr at 10:28 AM | Permalink
Categories: Collaboration, Conferences & presentations, Information architecture, Information management, Intranets, Usability & user-centered design

Segmenting staff information needs

There is no one-size-fits-all solution for meeting the needs of staff. Beyond the broadest level, the information needed by staff is not generic. Someone working in HR has quite distinct needs from a staff member in finance, the call centre, or in the sales team.

This is why organisations are progressively implementing personalisation or segmentation features as part of their corporate intranets or portals. While the functionality that can be implemented varies greatly, there is a single goal: to better target information to the specific staff who need it.

In practice, there are three main ways of segmenting staff needs for information, with a number of secondary considerations.

Three primary facets

There are three main aspects (or 'facets') that can be used to segment staff needs for information:

• job role
• business unit
• geographic location

[CM Briefing 2007-18, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 10:17 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, Intranets, James' articles

Collaboration tools are anti knowledge sharing?

There is a clear need for collaboration within organisations, and the rollout of collaboration tools will bring many benefits. What is not widely recognised, however, is that the unmanaged spread of collaboration tools can work against knowledge sharing.

While collaboration tools work extremely well for the staff using them, they can lead to hundreds (or thousands) of information 'silos', making it harder for other staff to find required information.

This briefing will explore this issue, drawing on experiences gained across many different organisations.

Collaboration works well

Collaboration spaces work very well for the staff using them. Team and project spaces are a particularly good example of this, providing an effective space for team members to communicate and collaborate in.

The ability to 'work in' these spaces is one of their greatest strengths, allowing easy sharing of content, documents, discussions, diaries and more. Far richer than file shares, intranets or document management systems, the current generation of collaboration tools have the potential to deliver considerable productivity benefits.

What also makes these spaces successful is the 'shared context' amongst users. Because they are actively engaged in the ongoing use of these spaces, everyone knows what's happening, and where to find key information.

In practice, collaboration areas naturally evolve to fit the needs of the staff who are using them, with the spaces matching the idiosyncrasies of the groups they serve.

[CM Briefing 2007-17, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 09:59 PM | Permalink
Categories: Collaboration, Enterprise 2.0, Information management, James' articles, Knowledge management

Business Process Interoperability Framework

AGIMO have released a new Business Process Interoperability Framework, to assist in coordination between Australian Government agencies. To quote:

The Australian Government Business Process Interoperability Framework (BPIF) provides a guide and tools to assist agencies in making the transition to connected and shared modes of operation. It has been endorsed by the Business Process Transformation Committee (BPTC) as a key tool to support whole of government business transformation.

The BPIF is a component of the Australian Government Interoperability Framework.

(The report came out a while ago, but has only just been published up to the AGIMO website.)

Posted by jamesr at 09:45 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information management

Adopting collaboration tools in four phases

I've been doing a lot of thinking recently about collaboration and collaboration tools. It's clear that there's a huge unmet need for this capability, but a lot of confusion about how best to introduce these tools to organisations.

What is equally sure is that just providing the tools and hoping for the best will make the situation dramatically worse, not better. So to avoid this, I've been exploring a possible model for how best to introduce collaboration tools. Here is a summary of my thoughts so far:

• Phase 0: Fragmentation

  As the usage of collaboration tools grows in an unmanaged an unconsidered way, so does the "fragmentation" of information. Key information is divided into ever-smaller spaces, locked up out of broad use, generating considerable information management and knowledge management problems. (This is not a search problem.)

• Phase 1: Gardening

  The starting point is to identify an overall owner for the collaboration tools, and to put in place simple governance, policies and management. Rather than trying to restrict usage, the approach is one of "gardening", helping to guide usage , connect the dots and identify best practices.

• Phase 2: Business solutions

  The next step is to identify key (and common) needs, and build solutions that are tailored to meet them. In this way, clear user needs can guide how to bring together different solutions (wikis, blogs, lists) into more coherent solutions. Possible targets include project collaboration, teaching or e-learning, collaborative authoring, communities of practice or research.

• Phase 3: Rich networks

  Organisation-wide collaboration will only be achieved with the silos are broken down between different spaces. This involves recognising the difference between "inwards" and "outwards" facing spaces, and putting in place processes for sharing and linking between them.

• Phase 4: Coherence

  This is the end goal, where there is coordination between the collaboration spaces at all levels, accessed through a personalised portal-like interface. The lines between different "tools" is blurred, creating a single working environment. (There's a lot to be done before anyone can reach this state.)

The idea behind this simple model is to give a "roadmap" for organisations confronted by the growing demands for collaboration tools. Not proscriptive, it aims to help "shape" the adoption of these tools, ensuring that common pitfalls are avoided.

I'll be writing more on this over the coming months...

(I'm also going to be talking more about this model at our after "Where collaboration tools fit in" sessions in Melbourne and Sydney. Come along and ask some questions!)

Posted by jamesr at 08:33 PM | Permalink
Categories: Collaboration, Information management, Intranets

Some comments on enterprise 2.0 and intranets

Oscar Berg has written a post on enterprise 2.0 and intranets. To quote:

With the adoption of Web 2.0 applications and technologies within an enterprise context (Enterprise 2.0), the old intranet sites will be replaced by or transform into a network of hyperlinked resources that connect people as well as content resources with each other. The enterprise portal serves as the entry point and provides enterprise users with a single gateway to wikis, blogs, web based productivity tools, collaboration and communication tools as well as to enterprise applications and content sources. Although all applications are not executed and all content is not displayed within the context of the enterprise portal, all the resources that are available to the employees can be found via the portal.

Posted by jamesr at 01:00 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, Intranets

Centralized or distributed?

Alan Pelz-Sharpe has written an item on centralised vs distributed approaches to ECM. To quote:

I was trawling through some old presentations the other day - when I came across a couple that were given at crisis points in major ECM implementations. What struck me about these was the focus on the architecture of the ECM system. In particular whether it should be centralized or distributed (most of my clients have been very large and often global in nature). The pro's and con's of federated ECM - the issues of replication etc are well understood. But what I think is less understood is the impact that this architectural approach has on ECM as a practice.

Posted by jamesr at 12:04 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, Information management

Elements of collaboration

Lars Trieloff has published a periodic table of collaboration. To quote:

The aim of "Elements of Collaboration" is to give an overview about current collaboration techniques and technology and to show how better collaboration can lead to improved workflows and higher productivity.

[Thanks to Patrick Lambe.]

Posted by jamesr at 05:19 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, Knowledge management

6x2: a new approach to planning

Intranets have now grown to be core tools for most organisations, tools they cannot do without. Despite this, it is still a struggle for intranet teams to gain the resources and support they need to sustain and grow their sites.

In general, it is not hard to describe what the 'perfect intranet' looks like, and each intranet team can generally paint a clear picture of their desired future site. What is needed, however, is a roadmap that helps intranet teams to get from 'here' to 'there' within current resource limits and other constraints.

The 6x2 methodology provides a powerful new way of planning that gives intranet teams a concrete and constructive way of tackling the growth of their sites. Taking a very different approach to the planning process, the 6x2 methodology focuses on the coming six months, asking the question: what are we going to deliver by the end of this six-month period?

By focusing on criteria (why would we pick a given activity?) and constraints (what is restricting potential activities?), this approach identifies activities that are both doable and worth doing.

Beyond intranets, the 6x2 methodology is also being applied to information management planning, and other similar domains.

This article will provide an overview of the 6x2 methodology, including a summary of each of the steps and examples of criteria and constraints.

[August KM Column, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 10:58 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, Intranets, James' articles

Your new site will be 20% different from current site

Implementing a new website or intranet is a unique opportunity to work with new functionality and ideas and push the bounds of what the site will do. When a new underlying platform is being implemented, such as a content management system or portal, the scope for rethinking the site can be increased further.

Yet, despite all of this opportunity for change, the simple rule of thumb is that the new site will be at best 20% different from the current site.

There are fundamental reasons for this, which will be explored in this briefing. The implications of the rule for the design and technology aspects of the project will also be discussed.

New ideas

'Blue sky thinking' explicitly provides scope for rethinking the purpose and design of the site, allowing radically new approaches and ideas to be considered. Even without this, any site redesign allows for some reconsideration of how the site is designed and delivered, along with a concrete opportunity to implement these changes.

When the underlying technology is also being changed (such as installing a new content management system), the opportunity for change is even greater. High ambitions combined with an opportunity for reworking the site, can generate the desire for significant site changes, such as:

• Reworking the entire site as a 'web 2.0' platform, where content will be actively provided by users.
• Reworking the static CMS-based intranet into a dynamic, personalised portal that will target information to specific staff roles.
• Creating a dynamic, data-driven website that will use user profiles to deliver targeted information and functionality.

These three examples have been drawn from real projects. While desirable in vision, such ambitious goals will always need to be tempered into a concrete scope for the project, and into a clear design for the site.

[CM Briefing 2007-14, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 10:51 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, James' articles, Web development

Confirmed: outside consumer forces drive enterprise technology

Joe McKendrick has summarised recent research on enterprise technology adoption. To quote:

Ben Worthen, writing in the Wall Street Journal's business technology blog, cites a new study from Yankee Group, which confirmed that 86% of employees say that they "use at least one consumer-oriented tech tool that isn't supported by the IT department -- things like instant messaging, USB drives, and iPhones -- in the workplace, with the average employee using four."

Posted by jamesr at 05:46 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information management

What is enterprise 2.0?

Fred Cavazza has written a long post that aims to answer the question: what is enterprise 2.0? To quote:

If "Web 2.0" was 2006’s buzzword, we begin to hear much of Enterprise 2.0. To make a long story short, it means using inside an enterprise the successful tools of web 2.0.

Please, do not sum-up this to internal blogs or wikis, this notion gather much richer fields and above all implies deep mutations which go farther than rolling-out new tools. Before going through my overview map (which can confuse you), I’d like first to introduce the subject.

[Thanks to Bill Ives.]

Posted by jamesr at 01:30 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information management

Practical enterprise architecture

Henrik Gustafsson has written an article on practical approaches to enterprise architecture. To quote:

I was bewildered when I first started working with Enterprise Architecture (EA). To me, so far, the subject had belonged to some strange guys working somewhere in a remote part of the enterprise. Once in a while, a decision or model came in the mail or were posted on the intranet with regards from those guys. Rarely anybody knew how to interpret the much too abstract or detailed directives, and consequently these directives were never followed. If you turned to them for some kind of advice, their advice was always delivered too late or was not applicable to the problem at hand.

The little example above is representative for a common esoteric approach to EA where only the few cult members of the EA team are able to decode or appreciate the runic messages and unworldly divinations. What constitutes a more practical and productive approach? Below are some short statements I once set up to find an alternative approach and EA.

This is a lovely list of common-sense principles for this type of work, all of which is much needed. (I have a similar list of 10 principles of effective information management.)

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

Where collaboration tools fit in (Brisbane, Melbourne, Sydney)

To meet the huge level of interest in collaboration at the moment, we've organised three more sessions on Where collaboration tools fit in, with dates as follows:

• Brisbane (12 September 2007)
• Melbourne (25 September 2007)
• Sydney (10 October 2007)

To quote:

With the rapid spread of collaboration tools such as SharePoint, the opportunity for new approaches to intranets and information management are being explored.

More immediately, organisations are confronted with the fundamental question: where do collaboration tools fit in? Are they a replacement for intranets and document management systems, or do they sit alongside? Where should initial projects be focused?

Best-practice thinking will be shared, giving you answers on how best to introduce collaboration tools within your organisation, regardless of the technology used. Several mini case studies will also be shared, exploring the scope and diversity of collaboration needs and solutions.

These are great afternoon sessions, and at $100 a pop (free for members of the Intranet Leadership Forum) you don't want to miss out!

Posted by jamesr at 04:43 AM | Permalink
Categories: Conferences & presentations, Content management, Information management, Intranets

Innovative Information Management Planning (Melbourne + Canberra)

We've also organised two new dates for Cairo Walker's Innovative Information Management Planning masterclass. The inaugural event was very well received, and there's more to come:

• Melbourne (21 September 2007)
• Canberra (8 November 2007)

To quote:

In this one-day masterclass, Cairo Walker will present an innovative methodology for information management planning that will ensure that above-the-waterline benefits will be realised within the first six months. Drawing on extensive IM and project management experience, this masterclass will present practical solutions to real-world situations and challenges.

Posted by jamesr at 06:32 AM | Permalink
Categories: Conferences & presentations, Information management

It's not not about the technology

Andrew McAfee talks about the problems with the phrase "it's not about the technology". To quote:

People usually mean one of two things when they say INATT; one of them is correct but somewhat uninformative, and the other conveys a lot of information, but is incorrect and even dangerous. The correct-but-bland meaning is "It's not about the technology alone." In other words, a piece of technology will not spontaneously or independently start delivering value, generating benefits, and doing precisely what its deployers want it to do. Technologies have to be managed in order to do any of these things; they're not magic bullets or miracle cures.

I started reading this post expecting to disagree with the contents, but ended up agreeing strongly with it. One difference I would highlight is that perhaps Andrew has only met with more enlightened organisations when he says: "I very rarely come across anyone these days who thinks that technologies are magic bullets." In my direct personal experience, I'm sadly still coming across plenty of organisations that are definitely still following the "magic bullet" approach...

Posted by jamesr at 05:35 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information management

Avoid long-term strategies

When it comes to information management or content management strategies, particularly at the enterprise level, there is a strong tendency (and desire) to create long-term plans. These plans may outline activities more than of 18 or 24 months in advance, starting with the deployment of base infrastructure, through to the final delivery of strong business functionality.

These plans mostly fail, and few ever end up delivering the hoped-for benefits. While this is not an argument for abandoning strategic planning entirely, it raises a question whether long-term plans are the most sensible approach.

This briefing will explore some of the issues encountered when creating and executing long-term plans, and will argue for an approach that delivers benefits on a much more frequent basis.

Source of long-term plans

Two- or three-year strategies are common in the domains of IT and IS. These types of strategies arise as a natural result of working backwards from the final objectives:

• The end result is identified, typically involving widespread and fundamental changes throughout the organisation.
• Major activities are identified to deliver these benefits, including changes to both technology and business processes.
• Underlying infrastructure will need to be put in place to enable the new functionality to be delivered. This typically involves purchasing new software.
• Detailed plans and specifications are needed to guide the selection, design and implementation of this solution.
• Business analysis needs to be conducted to identify overall business needs and specific requirements, as the primary input into the plans and specifications.

Each of these steps takes three to six months to complete, making the total project at least 12-24 months in total.

[CM Briefing 2007-12, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 03:30 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, James' articles

Chatting bolsters business

No longer the antithesis of working hard, online chat has become an integral part of core business processes in some organisations.

Across both the public and private sectors there is a trend toward online chat as a valid business tool, particularly in call centre environments. By using online chat to supplement traditional information sources such as intranets and training folders, staff are provided with answers to specific problems and questions and access to specific staff in real-time.

Online chat can be used to:

• to leverage the collective knowledge resources and research capability of the team
• as a training and management tool
• to contact remote staff who are unable to respond to a phone call
• for staff socialisation.

This article explores the use of online chat in business and describes a case study of the use of instant messaging within a national enquiry centre for a government department that fields calls from the public across Australia.

What's all the chatter about?

Online chat is a text-based communication tool. Whereas email is to an electronic version of sending letters through the post, online chat is more like having a conversation with one or more people. Information is passed in real time and users can see whether others are available to chat. By setting their status as 'available', 'away', 'on a break' etc, users signal their availability to others. It is relatively unobtrusive and, unlike a telephone call, users are not forced to respond immediately.

Online chat supports both one-to-one and one-to-many relationships and communities. Users can have several chat sessions going at one time with different individuals and groups. Typically within the call centre environment there is one team chat session that is open all day running alongside one-to-one sessions.

[July KM Column by Cairo Walker, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 03:15 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, Intranets, Knowledge management

Personalisation vs segmentation

'Personalisation' is a term very much in fashion at present. It is used by vendors to sell their products, and promoted by website and intranet managers as a way of delivering a brave new era of functionality. Separate from debates regarding the merits and approaches to personalisation, there is considerable confusion about the meaning of the word itself.

As the use of personalisation spreads, this confusion has grown. Personalisation is now routinely used for everything from 'my links' functionality, to fine-grained targeting of information to specific staff roles.

The absence of consistent terminology in this space is now causing considerable difficulty for purchasers of technology, and organisations in general. Without a clear understanding of what is meant, it is often difficult to assess the value of products, and even harder to measure the success of personalisation features.

At the risk of introducing still more terminology into this fragmented marketplace, this briefing will draw a clear line between two separate functionalities:

• Personalisation, whereby individual users can choose or configure what is delivered to them.
• Segmentation, where organisations tailor or selectively deliver information or tools to specific audience groups.

This briefing will explore each of these categories, hopefully bringing some measure of clarity to this space.

[CMb 2007-10, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 09:24 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, Information management, Intranets, James' articles

Do staff make use of personalisation features?

Due to technology improvements, personalisation is a growing feature in both intranet and portal usage. Organisations around the world have already made their first forays into personalisation, however many more organisations are questioning what to personalise and how to go about it.

So who is using personalisation and how effective it is? Early in 2007 we ran a worldwide survey to establish the extent that personalisation is being used in intranets and portals.

This article discusses the results of the survey, common themes within the survey and some observations on personalisation projects throughout the world. Comments from the survey respondents are used throughout the article.

Personalisation is seen as a desirable enhancement for intranets, and a major selling point for portals. Our key question was: to what extent do staff actually make use of these features?

[June KM Column by Catherine Grenfell, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 09:04 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, Information management, Intranets

Leading and creating collaboration in decentralised organisations

Heather M. Caruso, Todd Rogers and Max Bazerman have written a working paper on creating collaboration in decentralised organisations. To quote:

No matter how a multi-divisional organization is designed, it will need to find effective ways for its units to spontaneously and responsively cross boundaries. This paper discusses 3 key barriers to collaboration and information-sharing within an organization, and offers 3 strategies to overcome them.

Posted by jamesr at 04:59 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, Knowledge management

The IM family

Just catching up on my blogging, Patrick Kennedy has written a very amusing post describing the IM family. To quote:

A discussion last week, during Bob Boiko's Taming the Content Beast workshop, lead me to personify the various information management systems that currently muddy the waters for many an enterprise.

Posted by jamesr at 12:21 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information management

Increasing portal adoption with user scenarios

Paul Bryan has written an article on increasing portal adoption with user scenarios. To quote:

Low user adoption of company portals -- a common complaint these days as many companies upgrade their extranets and intranets -- is often a result of focusing on technical requirements rather than the real-life context of the system. User scenarios can help bridge the gap.

Posted by jamesr at 03:08 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, Information management, Intranets

Where collaboration tools fit in (Canberra, 3 July 2007)

We've just organised the first in our new round of afternoon sessions, titled Where collaboration tools fit in. Scheduled for Canberra on July 3, this is what we'll be covering:

With the rapid spread of collaboration tools such as SharePoint, the opportunity for new approaches to intranets and information management are being explored.

More immediately, organisations are confronted with the fundamental question: where do collaboration tools fit in? Are they a replacement for intranets and document management systems, or do they sit alongside? Where should initial projects be focused?

This industry briefing presents an innovative and effective model that outlines:

• three levels of information management within organisations
• inwards and outwards focused information
• where collaboration tools should be focused
• taking a 'portfolio' approach to collaboration technologies
• managing the relationship between collaboration tools and other systems

This model is designed to provide a common understanding within organisations, helping to target collaboration efforts for greatest impact. Presented by Step Two Designs, the recognised thought-leader on intranets and information management, this briefing is entirely vendor-neutral.

Numbers are strictly limited, and this is a hot topic. So read the full event details, and book quickly!

Posted by jamesr at 10:58 AM | Permalink
Categories: Conferences & presentations, Content management, Information management, Intranets, Knowledge management

Compliance is not a big driver for ECM

Alan Pelz-Sharpe has written a blog post outlining his observation that compliance is not a big driver for ECM in practice. To quote:

I have thought this for a long time, and my personal experience in consulting confirmed this, but polls and analysis by my industry peers say otherwise. From my perspective the uncomfortable truth is this: building an honest, worthy business case for ECM based on compliancy will have little chance of success, while building one for process and revenue improvement will likely breeze though every time.

This completely matches my experience, and I have never seen a business case built on "fear" of compliance, no matter the organisation...

Posted by jamesr at 03:14 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, Information management

Innovative Information Management Planning (27 June, Sydney)

In this one-day masterclass, Cairo Walker will present an innovative methodology for information management planning that will ensure that above-the-waterline benefits will be realised within the first six months. Drawing on extensive IM and project management experience, this masterclass will present practical solutions to real-world situations and challenges.

Innovative Information Management Planning
Wednesday, 27 June 2007
Mercure Hotel, Sydney

To be successful, information management initiatives must quickly become valuable to the business, delivering tangible and visible benefits. This is particularly challenging when information management projects are large and complex, with the goal of addressing problems that have not proven easy to solve in the past.

Approaches often start with 100-page strategy documents or detailed project plans, moving into content and systems audits or the end-to-end mapping of complex business processes. By the time these activities are completed, they are already out of date.

This one-day masterclass provides information management teams with an opportunity to focus exclusively on information management strategy and planning. Current directions will be challenged, and new techniques and approaches provided to deliver above-the-waterline benefits within the first six months.

This masterclass is suitable for experienced information management practitioners, as well as those managing initiatives in the earlier stages of development. It is particularly valuable for those managers who have recognised common challenges and are looking for solutions and answers.

Topics covered during the day:

• traditional approaches to information management planning and why these haven't worked
• the ten principles for effective information management
• creating an effective 'sales pitch'
• identifying staff needs (including techniques such as staff interviews, workplace observation, contextual inquiry and task analysis)
• putting in place a realistic information management roadmap
• positioning information management as an effective business tool that contributes to organisational goals and bottom line results
• leading successful initiatives and gaining management support
• redefining the role of information management teams

The workshop will also explore the brand new 6x2 planning methodology, developed to give information management teams a practical approach for information management planning.

Full event details

Posted by jamesr at 01:44 PM | Permalink
Categories: Conferences & presentations, Information management

Taxonomy and metadata strategies for effective content management (June, Australia)

Taxonomies are a hot topic at present, with many organisations exploring how these can be used to coordinate practices across organisations and to integrate business systems. While the word 'taxonomy' is often used, it is often less clear what this means in practice, and how to make it all work.

For this reason, Step Two Designs is bringing out Joseph Busch to Australia, as the recognised taxonomy expert from the United States. Uniquely, Joseph combines this with an in-depth knowledge of content management and how to implement taxonomies in real-world settings.

Taxonomy and metadata strategies for effective content management

• Melbourne (Crowne Plaza): 7 June 2007
• Sydney (Mercure Hotel): 12 June 2007
• Canberra (Hyatt Hotel): 15 June 2007

In these one day masterclasses, Joseph will provide practical answers to core taxonomy questions such as:

• What is a taxonomy?
• How do you get one and does it really make a difference?
• How do you organise user tests and use the results in a CMS implementation?
• How do you get content tagged up using a taxonomy?

Joseph will then go on to provide answers to the hard questions about enterprise content architecture strategies, including:

• What does every content manager need to know about taxonomies and metadata?
• How can a taxonomy and metadata model drive successful search, workflow, content re-use, and the automation of content production processes?
• What are the critical elements of a business case for a content architecture?
• What are the critical do's and don'ts of designing a metadata and taxonomy model?
• How do you test a taxonomy's effectiveness with users?

These are Joseph's first events in Australia, and they are relevant for every team tasked with designing or implementing a taxonomy.

Full event details

Posted by jamesr at 12:13 PM | Permalink
Categories: Conferences & presentations, Content management, Information architecture, Information management, Intranets, Knowledge management

Mass adoption of social software

R. Todd Stephens talks about the application of the 1% participation rate to enterprises. To quote:

To keep the math simple, let us assume that we have 100,000 employees. Based on the Wikipedia numbers, we might expect to have 1,000 people updating content. Of course, that would only be in a perfect world. The actual number may only be around 100.

Posted by jamesr at 09:24 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, Intranet Leadership Forum, Intranets

Methodology for web 2.0 collaboration experiments (in reluctant organizations)

Dave Pollard has written an article providing a methodology for web 2.0 experiments in corporations. To quote:

... any methodology that hopes to help improve collaboration in an organization needs to be very adaptable, modest in resource demands, sponsored, and attuned to the complexity of collaboration challenges. I think I've come up with a methodology that meets these requirements, and it's illustrated above.

Posted by jamesr at 08:40 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, Intranets, Knowledge management

Companies slow to adopt advanced portal technology

Toby Ward shares that companies are slow to adopt advanced portal technology. To quote:

According to a new Gartner report on portals, "Portals Are the Swiss Army Knives of Enterprise Software," more than 50% of portal deployments (70% probability) are first generation portals with technology and features developed in the late 90s (no personalization, and little or no application integration).

Posted by jamesr at 12:04 AM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, Information management, Intranets

Enterprise IA methodologies: starting two steps earlier

I've just had an article published on Boxes and Arrows titled Enterprise IA methodologies: starting two steps earlier. This follows on from my talks at both the IA Summit and Oz-IA events, and to quote:

Information architects working within enterprises are confronted by unique challenges relating to organisational culture, business processes, and internal politics. Compared to public website or interface design projects, key aspects differ in the application of IA discipline relating to uncertainties around the exact nature of the business problems being solved.

Posted by jamesr at 02:49 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture, Information management, Intranets, James' articles

Enterprise 2.0 - to be or not to be? Depends on how you approach it...

Jane McConnell has written an entry on enterprise 2.0 and intranets. To quote:

You can drive organisational change through meeting user and business needs and 2.0 will sometimes be the best way forward. I have devised the following 5-step process for organisations considering 2.0. The order of the steps and the function-based approach lower the risks of failure or stagnation.

Posted by jamesr at 01:09 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, Intranets

FastForwarding to a better understanding, part 3

Andrew McAfee has written another insightful piece about enterprise 2.0. To quote:

My skepticism about any wildfire spread of E2.0 stems from the fact that the new tools and approaches will succeed over time only in environments that have a set of characteristics. Technical characteristics are the most obvious of these. As the IWeek survey highlighted, security and access control remain key concerns among technologists, and they'll have to be addressed before most IT departments give their blessings to Enterprise 2.0. In addition, the user interfaces of many (most?) current tools will also need to be improved. A student told me last week that employees at a large tech company she's familiar with used to use wikis heavily, but now they just use Google Docs for group-level collaboration. The Docs are trivially easy to set up and edit, and even though they don't offer full wiki functionality (yet) they work well enough for many purposes.

Posted by jamesr at 07:59 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information management

There are no "KM systems"

With the rise of knowledge management as a discipline, vendors increasingly rebranded their products as 'knowledge management systems' (KMS). While this was a convenient label to cover a broad range of functionality, the use of 'KMS' as a term has caused considerable confusion.

For this reason, this briefing will argue that organisations should abandon the search for a 'KMS', and instead focus more closely on the specific capabilities required. Vendors are similarly encouraged to more clearly define their product capabilities, and to let go use of the catch-all 'KMS' label.

Technology and KM

As defined by the Australian Standard on knowledge management (AS 5037-2005), knowledge management can be considered to consist of:

• people
• process
• technology
• content

In this way, it can be seen that while KM is not a technology discipline, technology plays a key role in delivering and supporting KM services. Within any organisation, there will almost certainly be the need for some technology (new or existing) to support overall knowledge management initiatives.

Quite naturally, some organisations are therefore going to the marketplace in search of 'knowledge management systems', as part of the KM projects.

[CM Briefing 2007-03, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 11:43 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, James' articles, Knowledge management

The importance of 'tangible' and 'visible'

Intranets are often invisible tools within organisations. While staff rely on the intranet to help them complete common tasks, the site itself is taken for granted. The intranet team is similarly low in visibility, with little senior management recognition of the team or its role.

The net effect is that intranet teams work hard from month to month, but struggle to gain the support and resources required to deliver a truly great site. While this is perhaps a natural by-product of the role of intranets within organisations, intranet teams can do much to increase their level of recognition (and therefore their budget and resources).

To achieve this, intranet teams should be guided by two words when planning intranet activities: tangible and visible.

Tangible means that the intranet team can demonstrate the value that the activity delivers to the organisation. Visible means that the benefits can be clearly seen, or communicated throughout the organisation.

At any given point, intranet teams should be conducting enough activities that are both tangible and visible to ensure that they sustain enthusiasm and support for the site. While there are behind-the-scenes improvements to be made to intranets, these should be paired with activities that are tangible and visible.

This article explores this concept, providing practical examples of activities that range across the whole spectrum.

[March KM Column, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 10:58 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, Intranets, James' articles

Enterprise 2.0 may require 'nudge 2.0'

Joe McKendrick reports on the latest edition of InformationWeek covering enterprise 2.0. To quote:

InformationWeek commissioned a survey of 250 IT executives, which found that close to a third, 32%, already have active Web 2.0 initiatives underway -- such as blogs, wikis, search, or mashups. Wikis are widely used at six percent of companies in the survey and used effectively by a few employees at 25% of companies. Mashups are widely used at about seven percent.

Posted by jamesr at 04:43 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, Intranets

Fitting the enterprise 2.0 square peg into the web 2.0 round hole

Joe McKendrick has written an article on the merging of enterprise and web 2.0. To quote:

Should Enterprise 2.0 and Web 2.0 be blended into one single category? Since the parade of Web 2.0 technologies has come to the fore, they have been mainly a consumer or business-to-consumer play, and have only tantalized the enterprise side. Web 2.0 is seen as an untamed frontier, open to all, an innovation a minute. By the way, that's the complete opposite of the approaches of cautious, security-minded, five-year-budget-cycled enterprise IT managers.

Posted by jamesr at 10:20 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information management

Modelling the new enterprise

Jevon McDonald has written an article outlining a model for the "new enterprise". To quote:

How will the New Enterprise look? How about a real world example? Here is a normalized and downscaled (1/100, some roles weighted) view of how democratizing tools and platforms can remove friction from an organization and allow relationships to build on an ad hoc basis.

Posted by jamesr at 01:18 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information management

Wikipatterns

There is a new site devoted to the adoption of wikis, called Wikipatterns. To quote:

Wikipatterns is not an instruction manual, it's a set of tools. It's examples of techniques that have helped people, and of situations that people have found themselves in that they wished they hadn't. We want to help to identify a nail, and know you might want to hit it with a hammer.

Even though this site is sponsored (and run) by one of the Wiki vendors, there's still lots of good stuff to browse through. It's good to see these kinds of discussions which pragmatically look at how to make it work (and when not to use wikis at all).

Posted by jamesr at 11:40 AM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, Information management, Intranets

Tear down these walls!?!?

Andrew McAfee has written a post on enterprise 2.0 adoption. To quote:

Howard's comment highlights an excellent question: what's the real problem if some E2.0 environments are mutually inaccessible walled gardens? If, for example, I'm a member of three distinct corporate wikis, each of which is accessible only to its members? If I work in sales, which has set up an internal 'blogosphere' open only to the sales staff, and also for the North American division, which has done the same thing? After all, as Howard points out, my RSS reader will let me know when anything of interest has changed in any of these environments, and my browser will let me skip among them with no effort at all. So how big a deal is it that these environments are walled gardens?

Posted by jamesr at 05:58 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information management

Beyond predictable workflows: enhancing productivity in artful business processes

C. Hill, R. Yates, C. Jones, and S. L. Kogan have written a journal article on managing 'artful' processes. To quote:

Aside from the issues of scale, lock-in, and dependency, certain types of work simply cannot be formalized well enough to safely entrust to an enterprise application. The goals and methods of some processes change too quickly over time; for example, the process of designing high-technology products. In some processes, it is primarily the content in each process instance -- rather than the process itself -- that determines the outcome; for example, a request for proposal (RFP) process. Most important, many highly specialized processes are developed or refined locally at the individual or small-team level such that the process cannot easily be separated from the specific people who perform it; for example, managing client relationships in professional services firms. While the framing process may be stable at an abstract level, the key details are not. They depend on the skills, experience, and judgment of the primary actors. We denote these kinds of processes artful in the sense that there is an art to their execution that would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to codify in an enterprise application.

[Thanks to Martin White.]

Posted by jamesr at 10:00 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, Knowledge management

Blogging on enterprise 2.0

I've just started blogging on enterprise 2.0 on the FASTForward blog, leading up to the FASTForward event in San Diego. This should be good fun, as will give me a different forum on which to explore my thoughts on this topic. I've already written a brief entry on gaining adoption, with more to come.

PS. I will be attending the San Diego event (February 7-9), so if you are in the area and would like to catch up for a chat at the end of one of the days, drop me a line.

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

A brief history of information (part 2)

Ted Byfield continues his series of articles looking at the history of the word "information". To quote:

In the centuries of use before its modern redefinition, as we've seen in Part 1, "information" had already toted up a formidable list of ambiguities. For example, it's an action in some usages and a thing in others, it's both singular and plural, and it's both an informal assertion of fact as well as a procedure for making a formal statement.

These slippery qualities made "information" a very amenable candidate as cybernetics pioneer Claude Shannon (and others) sought to name their developing, doubly negative idea of the reduction of uncertainty. They also seem to have made the word resistant to efforts to fix it with a precise or stable new meaning. So, in addition to its long-standing contradictory substance, Shannon's efforts added still more paradoxical attributes: information became something abstract yet measurable, significant but not meaningful, and, last but not least, present wherever communication occurs but is nowhere to be found.

Posted by jamesr at 12:39 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, Knowledge management

Managers say the majority of information obtained for their work is useless

An Accenture study reports on staff's ability to find useful information. To quote:

Half (51 percent) of customer service managers -- more than managers in any other area -- are likely to encounter challenges when trying to obtain information about other parts of the company. In addition, 40 percent of customer service managers -- more than those in any other function -- said that the most difficult aspect of managing information for their job is going to numerous sources of information.

[Thanks to Jack Vinson.]

Posted by jamesr at 08:20 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, Intranets, Metrics & ROI

A brief history of information

Ted Byfield has written an article that explores the history of the word "information". To quote:

The word seems to stand for everything, and nothing. "Information" describes everything from a precise mathematical property of communication systems, to discrete statements of fact or opinion (for example, the time a film begins or someone's perspective on a situation), to a staple of marketing rhetoric, to a world-historical phenomenon on the order of agriculture or industrialization.

The frequency and disparity of its use, by specialists and lay people alike, to describe countless general and specific aspects of life makes it difficult to analyze; no single academic discipline or method can offer an adequate explanation of the phenomenon.

Posted by jamesr at 02:58 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information management

Usability weaknesses inherent in portals

Joe Lamantia has written an entry on the usability issues with portals. To quote:

Portal user experiences suffer from a number of inbuilt usability weaknesses that the building blocks are designed to eliminate. For instance, flat tile schemes assume all tiles are structurally the same, and that they have no relationship to any other tiles. This makes all tiles of equal importance to the portal's information architecture. [Welcome to Flatland...] Yet any designer or information architect addressing diverse user needs and goals knows that the priorities of users make some content more important than others, and that the structure of the user experience should reflect these priorities and any necessary relationships.

Posted by jamesr at 06:44 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, Information management, Usability & user-centered design

The trouble with portal dashboards…

Janus Boye has written an article on the usability issues with portal dashboards. To quote:

Based on hundreds of interviews CMS Watch has conducted with users worldwide, it's clear that portal software customers must invest more in creating usable and accessible user interfaces. Today most organisations blindly adopt the default 'building block' approach to layout found in enterprise portals --- a relic from the early days of public internet portals.

Posted by jamesr at 08:16 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, Information management, Intranets, Usability & user-centered design

Feed your enterprise with RSS

Conceptually, 'news feeds' are quite simple, allowing content such as news articles to be delivered over the internet without the need to browse a website.

News feeds first came to our attention during the mid 90s when the hype surrounding 'push' was at its peak. The hype didn't last and it was some time before feeds were again the centre of attention as 'blogs' entered the mainstream, almost a decade later.

Nowadays everyone has a blog and many websites offer a variety of feeds, from news, blog posts and even blog post comments. The technology underpinning these feeds is predominantly RSS, which originally stood for 'Really Simple Syndication'.

For the purposes of this discussion, the terms RSS and 'news feeds' cover the actual RSS protocol (in all it's various versions) as well as Atom (a later refinement of the RSS protocol), RDF and any other type of asynchronous information feed.

Lately, the concept has evolved to include multimedia, with 'podcasting' making use of feeds to deliver audio (music and radio programmes) and, more recently, video (ie 'vodcasting').

Hence it's quite common for most web users to be using feeds on the public web. But what about within an organisation, are feeds useful there too?

RSS in the enterprise

A company can create its own feeds for internal use. The obvious use for these feeds is for distributing corporate news, particularly useful for multinational corporations where geography makes the coordinated updating of intranet news difficult.

However, there are a number of other hugely beneficial uses for feeds in the enterprise:

• compiling multiple content sources
• keeping up with industry developments
• easily publishing corporate news
• collaborating within project teams
• synchronising and replicating content

[November KM Column written by Patrick Kennedy, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 07:49 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, Information management, Intranets

Introducing collaboration technologies to the enterprise is a challenge

Dennis McDonald has written a piece on the challenge of introducing collaboration technologies in the enterprise. To quote:

Successful collaboration tool introduction is based less on the characteristics of the tool itself than on the motivation users have to use the tool, plus a heavy helping of Ease of Use. People who are already open to and involved in collaboration are more likely to adopt technological tools that support collaboration than people who aren't already open to or involved with collaboration.

Posted by jamesr at 01:26 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, Intranets, Knowledge management

Enterprise Web 2.0: barriers and answers

Rod Boothby has written a blog post that provides answers to Enterprise 2.0 barriers (which were listed by Jerry Bowles). To quote:

In the end, the adoption of Enterprise Web 2.0 technology is an issue of both risk and reward. Risk management is about balancing the risks with the business benefits. Enterprise IT is slowing the adoption of Web 2.0 because they are only familiar with the risk side of the equation. Isolated from the profit centers, enterprise IT only thinks about how things could go wrong, and then comes up with the logical answer of NO.

I'm not sure I agree with much of these discussions, as they are very technology-centric, and don't reflect a good understanding of staff motivations and work practices. Still, it's good t see the debate happening around where intranets (etc) should be going next...

[Thanks to Bill Ives.]

Posted by jamesr at 06:57 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, Information management, Intranets

Searching kills employee productivity

Toby Ward has written an article summarising recent research on search productivity. To quote:

The Center for Media Research reports that professional workers are spending more and more time searching for information. The survey, HotTopics: 2001 vs. 2005: Research Study Reveals Dramatic Changes Among Information Consumers, commissioned by Outsell, reveals that professionals on average spend 11 hours per week gathering information -- up from 8 hours per week in 2001.

Posted by jamesr at 12:09 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, Intranets, Search tools

A web 2.0 tour for the enterprise

Shiv Singh has written an article on web 2.0 tour for the enterprise. To quote:

Thanks to the hype generated by Business Week, The New York Times, Fortune, and Newsweek (among others), Web 2.0 has captured the imagination of consumers and businesses alike. But knowing how to leverage Web 2.0 concepts to fuel collaboration and innovation among employees, partners, and customers is another story. Web 2.0 can change an enterprise but recognizing how, and determining whether you should, do so is confusing. This article aims to dispel some of the myths surrounding Web 2.0 while discussing its practical applications within organizations. Then the enterprise -- businesses and their practices -- can embrace and extend Web 2.0 to Enterprise 2.0.

Posted by jamesr at 06:58 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information management, Intranets

Presentation: KM Australia (Sydney)

This week I gave a keynote presentation at the KM Australia conference on "The 10 principles for effective information management", which explored what hasn't worked, and introduced some key principles against to measure IM projects against. You can download my presentation:

10 principles for effective information management (PDF, 692kb)

(You can also read the original article the presentation was based on.)

Posted by jamesr at 12:45 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information management

Understanding the requirement for a portal

There is no doubt that fuelled by a compelling business need, a portal solution can provide real business advantage. However provisioning a portal when it is a content-managed site that is required, will result in the most expensive website or intranet that an organisation can build. What then should those organisations keen on entering the portal space consider? Using two case studies this article explores portals and seeks to answer this question by taking a look at:

• the difference between 'portal as a concept' and 'portal as a technology'
• the types of business initiatives that are well-suited to a portal
• the importance of aligning business users' thinking with that of those working in the information technology (IT) or information systems (IS) departments
• working out whether the business requirement is for a portal or a content-managed site

Enterprise information portals defined

Gaining an understanding of what exactly an enterprise information portal is can be difficult; in part because portals are completely invisible to the end user and in part because there is little agreement as to what exactly constitutes a portal. The earlier article Taking a business-centric approach to portals differentiated between 'portal as a concept', and 'portal as a technology.'

[August KM Column written by Cairo Walker, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 12:09 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, Information management, Intranets

The real cost of email in organisations

Much has been written about the impact of 'email overload', in terms of the productivity cost and impact on attention spans for staff. There is another very real cost of the reliance on email: the duplication of information management activities.

'All staff' emails are often used to send out new policies and procedures, product updates and other changes. These can range from a few paragraph to 50 pages, and it is left for each staff member to keep track of this information.

In an organisation of 1,000 staff, this leads to the effort of managing these updates being multiplied by a factor of a thousand, generating a significant impact on productivity, consistency and accuracy.

Corporate communication via email

'All staff' emails are often used as the primary way of distributing many types of information, including new policies and procedures, changes to IT systems, training materials and product updates.

In many cases, staff need to keep this information for later use. In practice, most staff store these messages in elaborate folders within their email program, so they can be quickly searched when needed. Every staff person comes up with their own folder structure, and conducts their own information management activities.

In practice, these email folders continue to grow until IT enforces limits on mailbox sizes, and they are required to delete potentially valuable information to meet IT policies.

[CM Briefing 2006-12, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 10:20 PM
Categories: Information management

Su