Articles by Category: James' articles

Don't try to boil the content ocean

The phrase 'trying to boil the ocean' refers to tasks that are clearly and heroically impossible. This is exactly what most teams take on when they try to get every intranet page up to the same high standard.

In the earlier article titled Intranet authoring: a hobby?, the role of intranet authors was explored, highlighting that many are required to maintain their content 'on the side', with little training or support.

Most intranets struggle to deliver consistent, accurate, readable and valuable content. Despite this, the goal of many intranet teams remains to deliver universally 'good' content.

This briefing will discuss common approaches to improving content, focusing on those that have failed. Suggestions will then be made on ways to target efforts for best effect.

Failed: content cleanups

Many teams attempt a content cleanup on a regular basis, perhaps every year or two. These involve reviewing most sections of the site, and the content contained within.

These reviews are looking for ROT (redundant, outdated or trivial), generating 'hit lists' of content that can be removed.

While these very easily remove hundreds or thousands of pages, the long term impact is negligible. As fast as content is reviewed by the central team, more is published by decentralised authors.

The process drains the energy of the intranet team, and often frustrates content owners. Even after a major cleanup, the intranet rapidly accumulates more content problems, and reverts to its previous state.

[CM Briefing 2008-06, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 08:45 AM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, Intranets, James' articles

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

The four purposes of an intranet [+ audio]

| View

As you may have noticed, I've been working steadily to capture some of the key concepts that underpin our intranet work. Some of these have already been shared as articles, and most in workshops, but this is a good way of getting these useful concepts out to a wider intranet audience.

This slidecast explores the four fundamental purposes of an intranet, looks at where intranets have traditionally focused, and where they should be going next if they want to demonstrate ROI.

(The audio was recorded at the recent IA Summit in Miami, Florida.)

Posted by jamesr at 09:39 AM | Permalink
Categories: Conferences & presentations, Intranets, James' articles

In-context vs back-end authoring

Most modern content management systems provide two different ways of editing site content: in-context editing and back-end editing.

While in-context editing is often seen as 'sexier', each method has its strengths and weaknesses. This briefing will explore these two editing options, providing advice on when to use them in practice.

In-context editing

In-context editing allows authors to browse the published website, using site navigation in the normal way to find the desired page.

By clicking a small or hidden button (or some other equivalent action), they can switch into editing mode, updating the content of the page in place.

During editing, the author can see how the published page appears, including the formatting of the text. By updating the content 'in context', the author can immediately see the finished product, even as changes are being made. Depending on the vendor, this functionality may be called different things, including 'live site editing', 'in place editing' or 'surf-to-edit'.

The big advantage of this method is its simplicity. Authors are familiar with the structure of the published site, and comfortable with navigating through it.

By hiding most of the underlying complexity of the CMS, this alllows authors to concentrate on updating the content.

For these reasons, in-context editing is often seen as the more usable authoring option. It is also commonly seen as a more 'modern' option for updating the site.

In-context editing is not without weaknesses. The very simplicity of the interfaces makes some tasks harder, or at least, less obvious.

[CM Briefing 2008-04, read the full article]

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

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

Time needed to select a CMS

It will always take longer than hoped to select a new content management system. While an 'accelerated' approach can be taken, the reality is that somewhere between 6 and 12 months will probably be needed, from beginning to end.

To help clarify this statement, this briefing provides a breakdown of the individual steps and the amount of time needed for each. Use this to set appropriate stakeholder expectations, and to develop a realistic project plan.

Selecting a CMS: step-by-step

[CM Briefing 2008-01, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 09:04 AM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, James' articles

Promote intranet successes

As discussed in the earlier article Every intranet has its successes, there are few intranet teams who are not steadily delivering valuable improvements to their sites.

Despite this, many intranet teams are almost invisible within their organisations, with little recognition for the new enhancements and functionality they have delivered.

This must change, if intranet teams are to obtain the resources and support they need. Part of the solution is for intranet teams to be more proactive and effective in communicating their successes.

This briefing outlines a number of practical ways of promoting success stories, drawn from the real-life approaches taken by intranet teams across a variety of organisations.

Track successes

The first step is for intranet teams to be more disciplined in tracking intranet changes and new functionality. At the simplest level, this could just be a document listing the improvements in each month.

Even this simple document can be very effective at communicating to management (and the broader group of stakeholders) what the intranet team 'has actually been doing'.

This type of tracking also demonstrates the volume of work that is done by the intranet team, which is important when justifying existing team resources, or requesting additional staff.

[CM Briefing 2007-23, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 02:04 PM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets, James' articles

Collaboration is about people

A number of articles have recently been published on collaboration. Focusing on collaboration tools, these articles have explored when they work, the challenges involved and how to avoid these problems in practice.

In many ways, these articles have taken for granted the central aspect of collaboration: the people involved. This article will explore the human face of collaboration, touching upon a range of enterprise considerations.

Collaboration can't be forced

It make no sense to roll out collaboration tools to the whole organisation. Collaboration takes place between people, and can't be forced or created through the use of technology.

While it is possible to create new opportunities for collaboration using online tools, this is slow and hard, and not the best approach when implementing collaboration tools for the first time.

Instead, collaboration tools work best when they support existing collaboration taking place between individuals or groups within the organisation.

For example, regular meetings may be held between line managers to discuss quality assurance problems. A collaboration space can be a valuable support for discussions that are held during these regular (face-to-face) meetings.

Pilot collaboration projects should therefore seek out areas where there is a demand for tools to support existing groups or communities.

[CM Briefing 2007-22, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 01:27 PM | Permalink
Categories: Collaboration, James' articles, Knowledge management

Start by 'gardening' collaboration

Collaboration tools have been used in organisations for a long time now, and the new generation of tools is spreading at an incredible rate. Tools are being deployed in parallel across many different business units, irrespective of any organisation-wide strategy or support.

A planned approach must therefore be taken to the management of collaboration tools within organisations. While it is left to a future article to outline a full strategic roadmap, the first step is to put in place a model of 'gardening'.

This must be done now, before the 'horse has bolted'. Any delay will leave much cleanup to be done after the fact.

Addressing collaboration challenges

This briefing is one of a number of articles published on managing collaboration within organisations.

The earlier article Collaboration tools are anti knowledge sharing?, highlighted that while collaboration tools are great for meeting local and individual needs, they can be detrimental to organisation-wide knowledge sharing. Locking up all the content into small collaboration spaces can make it harder to find key information.

The article Successful collaboration requires support highlighted a range of resources that should be developed to help staff pick the right tools and make the best use of them. There also needs to be a central team who play a 'mentoring' role to the organisation, guiding the adoption and use of collaboration tools.

Gardening collaboration

Organisations should not stand in the way of collaboration, or create barriers to the adoption of collaboration tools. Equally, they should not stand by and let these tools spread without support or direction.

[CM Briefing 2007-21, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 07:26 PM | Permalink
Categories: Collaboration, James' articles

Successful collaboration requires support

Successful organisation-wide collaboration does not happen by chance. While the uptake of collaboration tools can be very rapid, some areas will use the tools well, while others will struggle (or fail).

Rolling out collaboration tools is not without its risks. As outlined in the earlier briefing Collaboration tools are anti knowledge sharing?, the fragmentation of information can be greatly increased when the number of individual spaces grows.

Organisations must, however, support collaboration (and collaboration tools) as the need for these is great. This briefing outlines some practical steps that all organisations should take to help business areas and staff make the best use of collaboration tools.

Immediate support

The topic of how to make collaboration succeed is very broad, and one that is still being explored (and debated) within the community. With collaboration tools being rolled out as we speak, however, it is imperative to put in place some immediate support.

This briefing focuses on some very practical steps that can be taken to dispel some of the confusion surrounding collaboration tools and help staff use them successfully.

[CM Briefing 2007-20, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 07:15 PM | Permalink
Categories: Collaboration, James' articles

Establish a portfolio of collaboration tools

There is no one-size-fits-all solution for collaboration needs within an organisation. Individual teams and business areas will have very different behaviours and requirements, and this must be reflected in the collaboration tools that are put in place.

To fully meet an organisation's collaboration needs, a 'portfolio' approach should be taken. This involves providing a range of supported tools, and allowing each area to pick the functionality that they require.

This briefing explores the portfolio approach, and provides guidance on making it work in practice.

Different needs

There are many different situations within any organisation that fall under the heading of 'collaboration'. Common examples include:

• Team-based collaboration, where a small group of staff work on a single project or other ongoing task.
• Communication and collaboration between a geographically dispersed group of staff, such as a working group or community of practice.
• Collaborative creation of documentation.
• Teaching and e-learning spaces that support educational needs.
• Ongoing research projects, where researchers and other experts share information.

Each of these situations will require a unique mix of collaboration tools, processes and practices.

[CM Briefing 2007-19, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 07:07 PM | Permalink
Categories: Collaboration, James' articles

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

Does your CMS vendor have product expertise?

Choosing a content management system (CMS) is not just about finding the product with the right functionality. It's also about dealing with a vendor who can support your needs for the lifetime of the solution.

You need to be confident that there will be more than just help-desk support - the vendor should offer regular (trouble-free) product upgrades, a clear development plan, and good mechanisms for handling the needs of each CMS customer.

The challenge is that many vendors are great at code development, but poor at product management. While they are small this doesn't matter, but as they grow in scale, customers start to feel the pinch.

This briefing explores the way most CMS vendors have evolved, what this means for the way they work, and what you should be looking for when purchasing a solution.

Evolution of vendors

Most CMS vendors start off as web development or web design agencies, custom-creating websites for their clients. Over time, customers increasingly demand the ability to maintain their own sites, and a variety of simple editing interfaces are developed on a case-by-case basis to support this.

Once this has been done a dozen times, this editing code starts to be pulled together into a single code-base, which is still tailored for each customer. As the agency grows, there comes a point where this editing and publishing code is given a name, and it starts down the road of becoming a 'product'.

[CM Briefing 2007-16, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 02:15 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, James' articles

Why staff visit the intranet

Organisations often envisage their intranets as integral to the way staff do their jobs. Staff are expected to visit the intranet daily. While this is an admirable goal, it doesn't necessarily match the reality of most intranets today. There are clear reasons for staff to use the intranet, but these are not always well understood.

In practice, there are two key reasons for a staff member to come to the intranet: to find a specific piece of information, or to complete a specific task. Recognising this, intranet designers can ensure that intranet resources are targeted in ways that will have the greatest impact.

This briefing explores these two key reasons for intranet usage, and discusses their impact on intranet strategies and approaches.

Two reasons for visiting the intranet

There are two fundamental reasons why staff visit the corporate intranet:

• Finding a specific piece of information

  The staff member is looking for a specific fact, detail or figure (such as how much leave they have left to take this year).

• Completing a specific task

  The staff member has a particular activity to do, which the intranet can help with (such as booking travel).

Note that in both cases, the staff member is not looking for the HR manual, a procedure, or some other general resource. Instead, they are seeking something very specific to meet an immediate need.

[CM Briefing 2007-15, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 02:05 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture, Intranets, James' articles, Usability & user-centered design

Using scenarios to select a CMS

Scenarios are narrative descriptions or stories that concisely outline how something will work in practice.

In the context of a content management system (CMS) project, scenarios are a very effective way of documenting key CMS requirements, and they complement the formal lists of functional requirements typically found in tender documents.

Content management scenarios provide a 'day in the life' description of how the CMS will be used, for example:

Richard enters the text for the page, and creates a link to the supporting PDF. Once the content has been spell-checked, Richard submits the page for review by Jane, his manager.

By using this story format, a large number of details can be conveyed in relatively few words. In practice, a single scenario can cover the same scope as several pages of functional requirements.

Scenarios are most effectively used during vendor demonstrations, to provide a 'script' for vendors to follow. This ensures that the vendor shows how the product will work in practice, meeting the specific needs of the organisation.

Having a common script across vendor demos also makes it easier to compare solutions, as well as providing a strong foundation for scoring the products against functional requirements.

This article will outline how to create effective scenarios, including concrete examples, guidelines and suggestions.

[September KM Column, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 01:55 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, James' articles

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

Apply IA techniques when creating taxonomies

Taxonomies define the structure that underpins document and records management systems, knowledge management projects and more. Considerable effort goes into developing these taxonomies, with the goal of creating a common structure that will benefit the whole organisation.

The challenge, however, is to ensure that these taxonomies work well for staff, beyond any organisational benefits that are sought. It is here that taxonomies often fail. If not designed well, taxonomies can become 'white elephants', too hard to understand and too complex to use. At their worst, poorly designed taxonomies are the direct causes of project and system failure.

The field of information architecture (IA) has much to offer those creating taxonomies, including a range of structured techniques for building and testing their effectiveness. This briefing outlines some of these approaches, and encourages creators of taxonomies to retain a clear focus on usability throughout the design process.

Building taxonomies

Taxonomies are typically drawn from a number of sources, including existing industry-wide classification schemes, business functions and structures already in place within sections of the organisation.

These are pulled together to create a larger or more complete taxonomy. Testing of this taxonomy usually relies on internal review, discussing the taxonomy with staff, and gaining input on areas of strength and weakness.

While effective for gaining broad user and stakeholder input, this kind of review is very shallow, and is not sufficient to ensure that the taxonomy can be used in practice. Instead, structured techniques must be used, getting beyond staff and expert opinions.

[CM Briefing 2007-13, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 10:45 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture, James' articles, Knowledge 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

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

Recordkeeping responsibilities on a single sheet of paper

With the move from paper to electronic documents, responsibility for recordkeeping within organisations has shifted to individual staff and away from centralised records management specialists.

Much is made of the need for all staff to understand their recordkeeping responsibilities. To this end, many training and communication programs are conducted within government agencies (and elsewhere).

To a large extent, this training has failed. While staff gain a general awareness of recordkeeping, they are not provided with sufficiently concrete and detailed guidance to make their recordkeeping successful and consistent.

This article explores ways to help staff meet their recordkeeping obligations by creating a single sheet of paper for each staff member with everything that they need to know.

Traditional recordkeeping training

Most organisations have fairly well-established staff training programs on recordkeeping, covering topics such as:

• what is a record
• why records need to be kept
• recordkeeping obligations of all staff
• how to file records in corporate record keeping systems
• when and how to dispose of records

Crucially, this training only talks of records in general terms, outlining statements such as 'records are any documents that provide evidence of a decision or activity'. In practice, not every document or email should be kept, and these general statements do little to help staff make judgements about what to file.

The training also fails to tell staff where to file individual records, other than generally pointing to the corporate records systems.

[CM Briefing 2007-08, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 04:02 PM | Permalink
Categories: Document & records management, James' articles

Every intranet has its successes

Running an intranet can be a huge and thankless task. All too often, intranet teams feel that they have made little progress towards their long-term ambitions for their sites.

While the success levels of intranets vary greatly, there are very few sites that do not contain at least a couple of successes. These successes may be small, perhaps benefiting only one group of staff, or they may be substantial pieces of functionality that support the whole organisation.

In either case, it is important to fully recognise these successes, and to communicate them throughout the organisation. Intranet teams should also take care not to forget that much has been delivered, even if there is much yet to be done.

This briefing explores the idea of intranet successes, how to identify them, and how to gain the greatest value from them.

Identifying intranet successes

Intranet successes may sometimes be very obvious, the 'killer apps' that drive site usage and reputation. These may be related to core business functions, or to the social environment within organisations.

In many situations, however, successes may not be recognised as such. Even small improvements to the functionality or content of a site may greatly benefit a single business area.

For example, in one call centre, a simple calculator tool for determining the tax payable on a transaction turned out to be the most successful aspect of the whole call centre intranet. This functionality took only a few days to develop.

[CM Briefing 2007-07, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 03:44 PM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets, James' articles

11 usability principles for CMS products

The functionality of the content management system (CMS) is obviously a key deciding factor when purchasing a new product. Equally important is the usability of the CMS. If staff, particularly authors, cannot easily make use of the CMS, then the system will never be a success, regardless of how powerful it may be.

The overall usability of CMS products, and their suitability for their intended users, is therefore increasingly closely scrutinised during the evaluation and selection process. One key challenge remains, however, which is how best to define (and ultimately evaluate) the 'usability' of a content management system.

While there are no simple answers to this question, this article is intended to provide some starting points for organisations looking to select a CMS.

The article focuses on exploring a number of key principles that can be used to guide the evaluation of CMS usability. These principles can be used when constructing scenarios for use in the vendor demonstration, as well as when documenting the CMS requirements.

It is hoped that this article will promote further discussion among the CMS industry on how best to design and deliver usable products. Vendors are also encouraged to consider these principles when planning upgrades to their products, to help ensure that usability is not sacrificed in the name of added functionality.

[May KM Column, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 03:15 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, James' articles, Usability & user-centered design

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

Intranet teams must cover the three purposes

The earlier article Three fundamental purposes of an intranet identified that there are three main aspects that must be addressed for an intranet to be successful:

• content
• communication
• activity

Content refers to the traditional role of the intranet as a repository of corporate information, while the intranet can also be an effective communications channel, and a mechanism to provide task-oriented tools and systems.

The challenge for organisations is ensuring that all three purposes are addressed, for any one in isolation is not enough to build a sustainable and effective intranet. This briefing builds on the earlier article, to explore what this means for intranet teams on a strategic and day-to-day basis.

Many possible owners

Intranet teams may be located within a number of possible areas of the organisation, including:

• IT
• communications or marketing
• KM or IM
• business area (such as HR)

As discussed in the earlier article Who should own the intranet?, it doesn't matter where the intranet team sits as long as they have the right skills and focus. The challenge is that the intranet team will naturally be influenced by the area of the business that they sit within.

[CM Briefing 2007-05, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 11:18 PM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets, James' articles

Three fundamental purposes of an intranet

Intranets often focus on one or two key aspects, depending on who is running the site. The intranet maybe established as a communications channel, or as a repository for corporate content. When tackled in this narrow way, intranets often struggle to be sustainable and successful in the longer term.

To be truly effective, intranets need to address three fundamental purposes:

• content
• communication
• activity

This briefing will explore each of these purposes, and will outline how all three elements are required if the intranet is to be effective.

Content

The intranet's role as a repository for corporate information is well understood. Disciplines such as usability and information architecture have done much to improve the ability of staff to find required information on corporate intranets.

Considerable effort is put into maintaining the intranet as a content repository, including implementing a content management system, establishing authoring processes and defining intranet governance policies.

While the intranet will always play an important role in delivering content, this is not the aspect that will drive the success of the site. As a 'place for reading things', the intranet is only accessed when needed, often only every week, month or quarter.

[CM Briefing 2007-06, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 10:57 PM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets, James' articles

Building innovative intranets

The concept of innovation, and the advantages it can deliver, have come to the forefront in many organisations. With organisations as recognising that market opportunities can be generated through business innovation, it is natural to ask whether the intranets that serve these organisations can themselves be innovative.

In many ways, it is vital for intranets to innovate if they are to prosper in the long term. As things currently stand, intranets are often seen as 'dull but useful', which can make it difficult for intranet teams to gain the resources they require.

Building more innovative intranets gives the opportunity to demonstrate the value that intranets can deliver for an organisation more clearly and powerfully. The obvious question is how can intranet teams most effectively make their sites more innovative?

This article explores a number of approaches that can be taken to build innovative intranets, all of which will help intranet teams to move beyond just maintaining their current sites.

What should be highlighted from the outset, however, is that innovation is not primarily about new technologies. While these do play a role, the evolution of intranets into more effective platforms is much more about following innovative approaches than in implementing the latest tools.

This article will therefore focus on providing a holistic approach to innovation, covering people, process and technology.

[April KM Column, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 10:48 PM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets, James' articles

Intranet benchmarking for free

It can often be hard to assess where your own intranet is up to. By definition, other organisations" intranets cannot be seen, and there are few absolute measures to assess intranets against.

A strong desire remains, however, to clearly assess the intranet"s strengths and weaknesses, and to gain some insight into how the site is progressing against general "best practice". To help meet these needs, this briefing will explore the Intranet Review Toolkit, a free way of benchmarking intranets against commonly accepted standards.

Intranet Review Toolkit

The Intranet Review Toolkit provides intranet managers and designers with an easy-to-use method of assessing the strengths and weaknesses of their intranet. It contains a substantial set of heuristics (guidelines or criteria), allowing a detailed intranet review to be conducted that focuses on a wide range of functionality, design and strategy.

While there are a number of published heuristics for reviewing public websites, up to now there has been no equivalent set for corporate intranets. Initially supported by an IA Institute Progress Grant, the Intranet Review Toolkit was drawn from experiences running expert reviews in many different organisations.

The Toolkit was then developed and published as a comprehensive set of intranet heuristics. It has been published under a Creative Commons license, allowing it to be freely downloaded and used (as long as certain conditions are met).

[CM Briefing 2007-04, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 01:42 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture, Intranets, James' articles, Usability & user-centered design

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

Search doesn't work out-of-the-box

Search is broken on many websites and intranets. Search results pages are confusing and cluttered, and users can't easily find what they are looking for. It is tempting to think that this is a technology problem. Certainly, if there is a very old or very limited search engine in place, this will need to be replaced with a modern solution.

The danger, however, is that it can be believed that simply purchasing and installing a new search engine will solve all these problems. The reality is that search doesn't work 'out-of-the-box', and that there is a small (but vital) piece of work needed to design and tune the search engine to make it effective.

This briefing outlines some of the activities needed to make search effective, highlighting key steps that can be completed within just a few days.

Not just a technology problem

Every site (website or intranet) is different, with a unique mix of documents, content and metadata. The nature of searches will also vary, depending on the tasks of site visitors. For this reason, the search engine must be configured to match the characteristics of the site that is being searched. Only when this is done can the search engine return meaningful results.

For this reason, there is no single 'best' way to configure search. Instead, there are key aspects to be tested and refined on a case-by-case basis.

[CM Briefing 2006-02, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 06:33 PM | Permalink
Categories: James' articles, Search tools

Plan before CMS implementation

It would seem to be a statement of the obvious that organisations should do their planning before embarking on the implementation of their new content management system (CMS). Yet all too often this doesn't occur.

Let's state this more strongly: the day after the contract is signed with the CMS vendor, the vendor will show up asking: so, what are we actually implementing? If there is not a clear and simple answer to this, the project will go poorly, and the vendor will be more than a little frustrated (which itself may have consequences).

This briefing explores the specific details that should be worked out up-front, ideally before the tender or RFP is even sent out.

Product versus project

In many cases, the selection of a new content management system is seen as a technology project with the goal of obtaining a new 'product' or piece of 'infrastructure'. When driven from this perspective, it is seen as reasonable to 'put a CMS in place', and then consider how best to make use of it.

The first problem is that vendors will be asked to provide a fixed-price quote for the implementation, which will then be locked in as part of contract negotiations. When the vendor turns up on day one of implementation, they therefore expect that everything will be in place for an immediate start.

At the end of the day, vendors want the implementation project to go smoothly, not least because it means that they will get paid sooner. With a 6 week implementation plan standard for mid-market vendors, there is only limited scope for additional planning and design.

[CMb 2006-22, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 08:28 AM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, James' articles

Usability and IA are core skills for intranet teams

It goes without saying that an intranet is only successful if staff can easily find the information they need, when they need it. Recognising this, the majority of intranet teams follow a 'user-centred methodology' when they redesign the intranet. This involves making use of core usability and information architecture (IA) techniques, such as card sorting and usability testing.

In many cases, intranet teams bring in external consultants or contractors to assist with the redesign project, relying on these individuals to provide the necessary usability and IA skills. While there are many good reasons for doing this, what is often not recognised is that these skills will continue to be needed throughout the lifetime of the intranet.

For this reason, usability and IA are core areas of expertise for intranet teams, and all organisations should take steps to build this expertise internally.

More than just redesigns

The primary focus of usability and information architecture activities is normally on the major redesign of the intranet. Taking many months, this redesign should (and often does) follow best-practice user-centred design principles. Beyond this major piece of work however, it is not as widely recognised that there is an ongoing need for usability and IA expertise relating to the intranet.

If nothing else, once the consultants have finished their work, it is left to the intranet team to actually put the designs into practice. Since there is a limit to what the delivered designs can cover every issue, there will be many small (and sometimes large) decisions yet to make.

These decisions will arise throughout the implementation phase, and will have a significant impact on the overall success of the redesign. If the intranet team does not have the necessary knowledge and skills, much of the value of the consultancy or contracting services may be lost.

[CMb 2006-21, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 08:18 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture, Intranets, James' articles

Top 10 mistakes when selecting a CMS

Organisations often make the selection of a CMS much harder than it needs to be. They do this by running into common pitfalls that impact not just on the selection process, but on the overall success of the CMS project.

Over the past ten years, we have worked with many organisations on content management systems, and have seen a huge number of tenders released to the marketplace. Across these projects, the same issues are seen again and again. These most often relate to how the requirements are documented, or how the overall tender is structured.

They may also arise from a lack of clear scope for the CMS project, or from the limited understanding of content management issues and the CMS marketplace. With the aim of tackling some of these issues, this article lists the top ten mistakes commonly seen when attempting to select a CMS.

At their heart, these are all simple issues to resolve, primarily by taking a common-sense approach to the selection process.

It is easy to get caught up in the detail of the requirements and the CMS project, losing sight of the overall objectives and process. The starting point is therefore to step back and to evaluate where the project is at, and how it will proceed.

By reviewing the project against the 'top 10' in this article, it should be possible to chart a rapid (but careful) path through the selection process, to the final deployment of a CMS that works well for authors, site administrators and the wider organisation.

1. Not understanding the problem to be solved

All too often, organisations rush into purchasing a new piece of technology before fully understanding the problem to be solved. For example, CMS selection may unfortunately be done before:

• determining the business needs and overall business goals
• identifying the underlying website design or management issues
• creating an overall website or intranet strategy
• identifying what functionality will be delivered by the site (rather than the CMS)
• choosing which sites will be in scope for the CMS project

[December KM Column, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 08:06 AM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, James' articles

Intranet as a mirror to the organisation

Every organisation has a unique mix of culture, business processes, history, technology and strategic directions (to name but a few factors). When it comes to intranets, it can then be said that they hold up a mirror to the organisation. To put it another way: the most successful intranets are those that directly reflect the unique nature of the organisations they serve.

One of the most immediate consequences of this is that we need to abandon the naive idea of the 'best' intranet. There can be no absolute measure of intranet quality and effectiveness, and the success of the intranet is only meaningfully measured within the local environment.

Organisations are unique

Even within a single industry sector, such as the insurance industry, the public sector, or healthcare, organisations are very different. These differences are generated by many factors, including:

• size
• geographic spread
• technology
• resources
• culture (staff and organisational)
• staff skills and experience
• history
• services offered
• strategic direction

The result is that every organisation has a unique environment, which strongly influences the direction and role of the intranet.

[CM Briefing 2006-20, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 08:20 PM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets, James' articles

Separate design and the CMS

There are two major elements to most web redevelopment projects: the redesign of the existing site, and the selection of a new (or replacement) content management system (CMS).

These two elements reflect the underlying issues that typically drive web projects: the problems with the structure and content of the published site, and issues with the management and publishing of the site.

The temptation can be to select a single provider to deliver both the redesign of the site and the underlying CMS. This would, however, be a mistake. Instead, organisations are almost always better served by separating out the design and the CMS, and sourcing these from different providers.

Website redesign

The primary reason for the website project is that the current site is broken. Typical issues include poor site structure, dated design and out of date content.

To address this, organisations should follow a user-centred design process. This involves applying a range of usability and information architecture techniques, such as card sorting and usability testing.

[CM Briefing 2006-18, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 02:50 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, James' articles, Usability & user-centered design, Web development

The enemy of intranets is apathy

Many intranet teams see themselves as battling resistance to change when attempting to grow the intranet or deliver new functionality. The challenge is perceived as overcoming these barriers to a successful intranet.

In practice, though, the real enemy of intranets is apathy. While at some level the organisation (and staff) recognise the need for an intranet, it is never an immediate enough issue to warrant significant resources.

Without a sense of urgency or a real mandate, intranet teams often limp along, targeting individual needs but never capturing the interest of the organisation as a whole. This briefing identifies the impact of apathy on intranet teams, and proposes some practical approaches for overcoming it.

No call to action

Most organisations have an intranet, yet the purpose of the site is often far from clear. While there may be an individual (or preferably a team) responsible for managing the intranet, it may still be difficult to get visibility throughout the organisation for the role and importance of the site.

When talking to senior management, the response is often:

"The intranet is certainly important, but there are other more immediate priorities at present, so it will be difficult to get funding in this budget period."

[CM Briefing 2006-17, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 02:44 PM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets, James' articles

Monthly intranet tasks

The intranet is not a one-off project. Instead, it must be supported by an ongoing process that ensures that the site continues to be effective. Beyond this, the intranet must also grow to match the ongoing evolution of the organisation that it serves.

In practice, there are a wide range of activities that intranet teams should conduct on a monthly basis. This article explores a good number of these, focusing on tasks that will build and nurture the intranet.

Monthly intranet activities

There are many month-to-month responsibilities for the intranet team. Some of these relate to maintaining the intranet and others to building support within the organisation.

While this list is long (and yet still far from complete), intranet teams should not be discouraged. Even if only half of these are covered in any given month, progress is still being made.

The list (in no particular order):

• Monitor usage statistics: usage statistics and search engine reports should be gathered, analysed, and communicated to key stakeholders.
• Nurture authoring community: ongoing support for authors should be built around regular face-to-face meetings.

[CM Briefing 2006-16, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 04:07 PM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets, James' articles

Creating an "intranet concept"

Intranet teams need to be clear on where they are heading, and what they will deliver. Typically, this involves writing either a bullet-point list of goals or a 20-page intranet strategy. In practice, the list of goals is too short (and too abstract), while the intranet strategy documents are often wordy but unclear. Neither form works well. What is needed is a single sheet of paper that captures where the intranet is at, where it is going, and what this means in the short-term in terms of actual deliverables. This is the basis for the "intranet concept", a succinct yet effective description of the intranet direction, written in a narrative format.

This article talks through how to create an intranet concept, and provides examples of two different formats that have been used.

A lack of clear direction

All too often, intranets have little clear direction, with day-to-day maintenance overcoming any attempts to define a clear roadmap for the future. This leads to communications with the business (and executive sponsors) focusing on the how (the behind-the- scenes work) rather than the what (business benefits being delivered).

This is one the contributing factors for the lack of resourcing and support that many intranets receive. It also makes it hard to build enthusiasm with the business when there is no clear future plans (and therefore benefits) for the site.

[September KM Column, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 03:50 PM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets, James' articles

Design intranets all the way to the bottom

Intranet redesigns are not small projects. There is a significant amount of design, usability and information architecture work, not to mention the laborious content migration process. What is launched is almost certainly an improvement on the old intranet, but the question must be asked: how much of an improvement?

In too many cases, the vast majority of effort is devoted to the intranet home page, the overall information architecture and the page layout. Lower pages in the site are often migrated more- or-less unchanged, with much of the internal structure within sections only slightly updated from the old intranet.

This concentrated focus on just the global elements of the site, however, may not be enough to deliver real benefits to staff. Instead, the design process must be continued all the way to the bottom of the intranet.

This briefing will explore this idea, giving examples of where efforts in the design process could be focused.

Global intranet elements

The design of the intranet home page is undoubtedly very important, as outlined in the earlier briefing Full site redesign? Start by addressing the home page.

It is also important to create an effective and consistent page layout that can be used throughout the site, underpinned by a vastly improved information architecture (site structure). These are the areas that typically receive the greatest attention during an intranet redesign. Once finalised, the existing intranet content is then migrated into this new structure.

There are a few weak points in this approach...

[CM Briefing 2006-14, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 08:13 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture, Intranets, James' articles

Login to the intranet

A very simple but very effective improvement to the intranet is to ensure that all staff login to the site in order to use it. This allows a number of immediate benefits to be offered, as well as providing a foundation for future enhancements.

That this is worth mentioning is an indication that many intranets are run on a shoestring, or have grown incrementally over time. These 'ad-hoc' intranets are often supported by a minimal (or non-existent) IT platform with no one positioned to implement these types of core features.

This article explores the benefits of implementing staff logins, and outlines how to make it work in practice.

Knowing your users

Having staff login to the intranet has almost nothing to do with security; it's all about knowing your users. Once you know who has logged in, it then becomes possible to deliver functionality that is specifically targeted or tailored to that staff member.

This opens up the door to many time-saving features on the intranet, most of which can be implemented incrementally with only a modest investment in technology and time. If an intranet redesign is being planned, one element of this should certainly be implementing staff login, if this is not already available on the site.

[CM Briefing 2006-13, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 12:33 PM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets, James' articles

Five key intranet policies

Most intranets have some form of policies and procedures, typically focusing on authoring guidelines and standards.

The question is: are these the right policies to have? In many cases, intranet teams have established policies that they find difficult to enforce, while missing the opportunity to develop policies that will be much more beneficial for both the intranet team and the site itself.

This briefing takes a different look at the role of intranet policies, and outlines five policies that all intranet teams should develop.

The role of intranet policies

Policies and procedures are all too often written as administrative or bureaucratic documents outlining how to operate within an organisation. A classic example of this is the "email usage policy", commonly written, but almost never read.

When it comes to the intranet, many organisations have policies that cover intranet authoring standards, such as writing style, linking policies, and the like. While these are certainly useful, there are policies that can have a much greater (and more direct) impact on the success of the intranet.

Intranet policies can be written as simple guides outlining how the intranet operates, and how it is to be managed. These 'human-friendly' policies should ideally be no more than a single page in length, designed to be given to intranet stakeholders and authors.

They should also be written by the intranet team, rather than some other group. The primary purpose of these policies is to answer common questions, or to resolve common issues.

More importantly, they give the intranet team support when dealing with difficult situations. Even when the policies have been written by the intranet team themselves, they still provide greater weight than just the verbal recommendations of the team.

[CM Briefing 2006-11, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 10:09 PM
Categories: Intranets, James' articles

Intranets as a news channel

Improving the effectiveness of internal communications is often one of the key goals underpinning corporate intranets. In practice, this is often reflected in 'latest news' section on the home page of most intranets. While news on the home page is certainly widespread, the question needs to be asked: how effective is it?

This article explores the role of the intranet as a news channel, revisiting some of the assumptions about how best to deliver online news within an organisation.

News on the home page

News is often the central element of intranet home pages, filling up the central area of the page and providing the most frequently updated content. This 'latest news' section is used to communicate a range of news items, including:

• CEO messages
• major corporate updates
• updated policies
• changes to the intranet itself

Updated regularly, this news section represents the intranet's role as a news channel, one that reaches staff throughout the organisation. The fundamental principle is to provide a single location that staff can visit to find out the latest happenings and updates.

Intranet news is also intended to be a 'pull factor' that will draw staff to the site every day, as well as giving the intranet ever-changing content that shows that the site is both useful and up-to-date.

[July KM Column, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 09:39 PM
Categories: Intranets, James' articles

Create a strong intranet brand

The intranet needs to have a strong brand, a sense of identity that, at a basic level, distinguishes it from the public website and other information sources within the organisation. Beyond this, the intranet brand should be designed to build staff trust, and to convey a clear sense of what the intranet can offer and when it should be used.

This briefing explores the role of the intranet's brand identity, as well as outlining how to put it into practice.

Lack of identity

Too many intranets consist of nothing more than a collection of many different intranet sub-sites, published by individual business units. With each of these sub-sites having a very different look-and-feel, it is hard to tell where the intranet starts and ends.

This situation is very damaging for the intranet, as there is no clear sense of identity for the site as a whole. Staff often have difficulty distinguishing between the intranet, the public website, and other sites on the broader internet.

It is also very hard for staff to find information, and the general level of trust in the intranet is often low.

Purpose of the intranet brand

The brand identity for the intranet serves many purposes, including:

• distinguishing the intranet from other information sources
• communicating the purpose and use of the intranet
• defining the scope and boundaries of the site
• building trust in the intranet
• supporting communications regarding the intranet

[CM Briefing 2006-10, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 12:35 PM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets, James' articles

When intranet discussion forums work

Intranet discussion forums are an often used mechanism within organisations. While they are implemented using a variety of tools and technologies, they all serve the same basic purpose of supporting communication and discussion. In practice, however, many discussion forums fail to prosper, with few (if any) posts being made to them. In other cases, discussion groups are hailed as great successes.

This article explores the differences between these experiences, and introduces two critical success factors for intranet discussion forums: a clear purpose, and a common community.

Many names, same goal

Intranet discussion forums may be called many things, including:

• bulletin boards
• discussion groups
• online forums
• collaboration areas

Regardless of what they are called, they are all designed to provide an area where staff can post questions or comments, or to hold discussions with other staff. The underlying purpose behind implementing these tools is often to increase the 'interactivity' of the intranet, and to support 'knowledge sharing' goals.

It is also worth noting that many of the same issues discussed in this article also apply to email lists, when used within organisations to facilitate discussion between staff.

Why do some online forums prosper, while others fail?

Mixed experiences

It is extremely interesting to talk to a group of intranet managers about their experiences with intranet discussion forums.

Half of the group will say:

These were a complete waste of time! Staff asked for them, so we implemented a number of bulletin boards, but no-one used them. We're definitely not doing that again!

The other half of the group will say:

These have been a huge success. There are many posts to the discussion groups every week, and they've taken away a lot of 'all staff' emails that were causing a lot of frustration.

In general, the success of online discussion forums has been very 'hit and miss'. Without a clear sense of when and why they work, some intranet teams have found them to be successful, while others deem them to be entirely useless. The obvious next step is therefore to compare exactly what each of these groups has done, to identify the underlying patterns.

[June KM Column, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 11:52 AM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets, James' articles

Podcast on how to start a content management project

Well, I'm excited! Rahel Bailie has recorded my first podcast on selecting a CMS. To quote:

James Robertson, internationally-known head of Australia's Step Two Designs, speaks frankly about a good starting point for content management implementations. Robertson asserts that a content management system solves no problem.

To be honest, it's weird to hear my voice online, and I don't think it sounds anything like me at all (Rahel sounds on tape like she does in real life, so I think it's something about the timbre of my voice). Anyway, it was great fun to do, and I look forward to more opportunities like this. Rahel has also published many other very interesting interviews over the last week...

Posted by jamesr at 11:22 AM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, James' articles

10 words to describe successful intranets

• Innovative
• Trusted
• Productive
• Useful
• Pervasive
• Usable
• Essential
• Collaborative
• Coherent
• Strategic

[CM Briefing 2006-08, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 04:21 PM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets, James' articles

Nine ways to fix intranet search

Search is often the greatest source of frustration on intranets. Irrelevant results, hard to read results pages and 'untitled document' entries plague many intranet searches.

With the size and scope of most intranets, search is a key tool used by staff to find information. While the expectation is that it should be quick and easy to find information on the intranet, this is often not the case.

Beyond generating staff frustration, these problems can reduce trust and confidence in the search tool. More broadly, the issues with search may be having a significant impact on the usage of the intranet as a whole.

This article therefore outlines nine steps that can be taken by all intranet teams to improve the effectiveness of search. References are made to previous articles that outline specific steps in greater detail.

Not a technology problem

On the whole, this is not a technology problem. Most modern search engines provide more than enough functionality for corporate intranet sites. The problem is that in too many cases, the search is simply installed 'out of the box', and then left untouched.

This default installation is rarely effective, and there is a modest amount of tuning and design work that is required to deliver a solution that matches the specific characteristics of the intranet being searched.

This article focuses on these design steps, and assumes that the currently-deployed search engine can be made to work much better without having to be replaced.

[May KM Column, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 11:09 AM | Permalink
Categories: James' articles, Search tools

CMS vendors are evaluating us

When organisations are looking for a new content management system (CMS), the selection process is designed to evaluate all the offerings in the marketplace to find the product that is the best fit to the organisation's needs.

Requirements are documented, and vendors asked to provide written responses, give demonstrations, and provide whatever other information is required. All of these activities are designed to assess the quality and effectiveness of the solutions on offer.

What is rarely recognised, however, is that while we are evaluating vendors, CMS vendors are also evaluating us.

Submitting a tender response

While we are looking for the best products in the marketplace, we don't stop to think that these vendors might also be in the most demand, and therefore the busiest. In practice, even a moderately successful CMS vendor will be receiving more than a half-dozen tender requests every week.

It costs real money for vendors to submit a tender response, as well as a significant amount of time. It is therefore not possible (or financially viable) for vendors to pursue every opportunity, as that would be a short road to bankruptcy.

Instead, vendors must pick which battles they will fight, with the primary goal being to win the highest percentage of tenders that they submit.

[CM Briefing 2006-06, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 09:49 AM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, James' articles

Obtain search in your CMS?

Organisations are looking for a wide range of capabilities when selecting a new content management system (CMS), and search is often one of the desired features.

Almost every site requires a search tool, whether it’s a website or intranet. In most cases, there is frustration with the current search, leading to the desire to bundle search as part of the new CMS solution. The question is: how good are the search capabilities built into CMS products, and when should you make use of them?

Three possibilities

There are three main ways in which search functionality can be obtained when purchasing a content management system:

• The CMS has search built into the package, developed in-house by the CMS vendor.
• A search tool is licensed by the CMS vendor, and tightly integrated into the overall solution.
• A third-party search engine is implemented separately, either purchased from the CMS vendor or obtained elsewhere.

Each of these possibilities is discussed in the following sections.

[CM Briefing 2006-05, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 09:40 AM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, James' articles, Search tools

Intranet authoring: a hobby?

The goal of many intranets is to deliver high quality, up-to-date, accurate and useful information to staff. In practice, however, this can be challenging to achieve. Much is expected of intranet authors, and they are vital to delivering an intranet that is useful (and used). Yet, in many cases, intranet authoring is treated as a hobby within organisations.

This briefing looks at the role of intranet authors, and challenges organisations to either take intranet authoring seriously, or to let go of unrealistic expectations regarding content quality and timeliness.

Is intranet authoring a hobby?

There are a number of clear signs that intranet authoring is treated as a hobby by organisations:

• intranet authors are not selected based on a required skill set, instead they are 'volunteered' by their managers
• intranet authoring is often done by junior staff within a business area, such as administrative staff
• staff are not provided with extra time to author intranet content, but are expected to do it on top of their existing responsibilities
• intranet authoring doesn't appear in formal job roles
• new intranet authors are provided little (if any) training
• ongoing support for intranet authors is minimal or non-existent

[CM Briefing 2006-03, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 02:55 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management, Intranets, James' articles

Leadership tips for intranet teams

Intranets require strong leaders if they are to be more than just publishing platforms for occasionally-used information. The intranet team must take on this leadership role, and drive the evolution and enhancement of the site.

This is not an easy role for some intranet teams to play, but ultimately it is one that is satisfying for the team, and greatly beneficial for the site itself. This article outlines a range of practical tips that can be applied to help intranet teams operate more effectively in this leadership role. These are all small (but important) steps that can be taken immediately by any intranet team.

Importance of a leadership role

Someone must 'own' the intranet, and take on responsibility for driving the site's evolution. As discussed in the earlier article Intranet teams: a leadership and coaching role, the centralised intranet team should play this leadership role.

This means more than just passively publishing information, or meeting the immediate needs of individual site owners. Beyond this, intranet teams can (and should) play a dynamic role in shaping the direction of intranets, as well as guiding their design and management.

Taking this leadership role may require a different set of skills, and a new perspective on the position of the intranet team in the organisation. This article therefore provides some practical tips on how to make these changes on a day-to-day basis.

[March KM Column, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 02:49 PM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets, James' articles

Intranet managers must be managers

While intranets often have someone appointed as the intranet 'manager', do they spend their time actually managing the site, or publishing pages?

Observing many organisations and intranets, one of the critical success factors is to have an intranet manager who is free to focus solely on the management of the site. The intranet manager should not be writing HTML or publishing pages.

Establishing an intranet team

An intranet 'team' of one is not enough, unless the organisation (or intranet) is very small. In the earlier article Roles needed in an intranet team, a very wide range of skills and responsibilities were identified for a successful team.

The article Intranet teams: survey results and key findings also highlighted that the average size of intranet teams is three, with the team size growing to match the size of the organisation and the intranet. In practice, this means that an intranet team will need to consist of an overall 'manager' (or 'coordinator'), along with several staff to do the actual day-to-day work on the site.

[CM Briefing 2006-02, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 11:28 AM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets, James' articles

Taking a business-centric approach to portals

Enterprise portals (generally known as just 'portals') rose to prominence several years ago. Complementing or replacing earlier technologies, portals promise to deliver a more coherent information management platform, and a more seamless user experience for staff.

Now that the early hype has died down, it is not surprising to find that portals are not a 'silver bullet' solution to all the information delivery challenges within organisations.

Like all technologies, portals have their strengths and weaknesses. These need to be well understood if they are to be successfully implemented within businesses. This article outlines the characteristics (good and bad) of enterprise portals, and proposes a business-centric approach to selecting and implementing portals.

Two definitions of portals

The word "portal" can mean many things. As recently highlighted by Janus Boye, the Wikipedia entry lists 13 different definitions for portal, not all of which relate to IT.

In practice, there are two main definitions that exist in the marketplace. The first is "portal as a concept", which encapsulates the general principles of providing staff with a single point of access to information. The second is "portal as a technology", which is the IT solution being promoted by a range of vendors.

[January KM Column, read the full article]

Posted by jamesr at 10:18 AM | Permalink