Posts tagged: knowledge management

  • Thursday
  • November 4
  • 2010

Thinking through a web content strategy

Content Strategy for the Web

The pending rebuild of Webdogs 2.0 is but a small piece of a larger plan: LSNC is investing a lot of work in coming months, rolling into most of next year, to rebuild the underlying infrastructure of its several public web sites.

The initial step has already been completed. Historically, LSNC built out its proliferating collection of sites, which we consider simply content areas, with individual WordPress installations. Now, all LSNC public sites have been migrated to WordPress 3.0, which supports a multisite content publishing network, and in several instances subdomains have been established as part of this new multisite integration. For example, LSNC’s inexplicably popular regulation summaries (which is pretty much nirvana for welfare nerds in California) are now located at http://regs.lsnc.net/. Other domain-specific sites like the California Food Stamp Guide, and this site, are all part of this integrated WordPress multisite network. Our IT folks love it, and more importantly our content editors love it.

The second step is underway, as you read: The very modest web design experiments being conducted here at Webdogs to work out a reasonably optimal approach to rebuilding the structural markup and CSS for use as a standardized template that we can propagate, in one form or another, to all the other LSNC public sites.

The third step will overlap the second, and relates to the overarching purpose of LSNC’s web presence: Take a fresh look at what content we have published, continue to publish and/or want to publish. As part of that process, it is not just that we expect to “refresh” various content areas at our sites; we expect to remove content that is either better, or at least better maintained, elsewhere, or deserves to die because it is plain ol’ out-of-date. And to repurpose content if we determine it needs to be made usable to readers in a different way.

The fourth step is to revisit how we manage our public content. This is a component, certainly not the whole of developing a sensible approach toward web content development. For those interested in this topic, one suggestion is to read Kristina Halvorson’s Content Strategy for the Web, a brief but bursting-with-ideas book.

To give you a sense of how we are discerning and discussing this internally, here’s a list of questions senior advocates were asked at a recent planning meeting:

  • what content do we already have?
  • who has it?
  • what content should we create that we don’t have?
  • who should create it?
  • how should the content be vetted or curated?
  • what should be the editorial strategy?
  • how should the content be prepared before distribution, in whatever form?
  • where should the content be located?
  • what form or medium should the content be?
  • how should the content be delivered or shared?
  • who should be responsible for maintaining the content?
  • what are the language issues
  • what are the accessibility issues

Our motto: Content rules.

  • Wednesday
  • January 27
  • 2010

Findability slides and video from 2010 TIG conference

I’m not sure what happened with the slides or recording of the Knowledge Management session at the recent 2010 TIG Conference. The session doesn’t show up in the LSC documentation of the event.

In any event, here’s a set of the slides for my “findability” segment, about search paradigms, findability as a concept and what we’ve done to implement enterprise search using a Google one-two punch: the Google Search Appliance in combo with the Google Apps platform. Also, here’s the brief flash video of our portal front end and search result/filtering examples that I ran during the presentation but displayed so poorly. The point of the video was to give the audience a real-world feel for how it all works. Again, my apologies for how bad the video displayed in that setting. Lesson learned.

  • Sunday
  • January 17
  • 2010

Coda re 2010 TIG Knowledge Management session

Last Wednesday at the 2010 LSC TIG Conference, Chicago-Kent’s Ron Staudt and I did a joint session, Knowledge Management – What It Is, Why It Matters, and (Google) Options For Making What You Know Findable. Ron, of course, was cogent, concise and charismatic and stayed within his presentation window and hit all his marks. Me? Regrettably, after all these years, I still haven’t figured out how to squeeze 10 pounds of cement into a 5 pound bag, and didn’t even get to several key points I had hoped to make about enterprise search and The Findability Project. To make matters worse on my end, at the beginning of my segment the Flash demo of how LSNC’s enterprise search front end works faltered badly since it displayed so poorly when projected. (More than one person mentioned to me afterwards that they were simply not able to see accurately what I was describing at the moment. (Uh, it seemed like a good idea at the time.)

With those apologies out of the way, allow me to annotate a few points now to make up for at least a few things that I did not cover during the presentation:

The LSNC “portal,” “intranet” and “document repository”

I feel I successfully got across the point that there is a broader sense of “search” at play that is important to grok, as an organization works toward enterprise or so-called “universal” search. However, because I ran out my clock and didn’t have time to talk at length, I didn’t quite get to describing the varied content targets that LSNC has identified as valuable, useful and usable and therefore all that which we wanted to make readily, easily findable. In going over all that, in passing I mentioned that The Findability Project originally included a SharePoint component which is now being abandoned, in favor of our relying on components of the Google Apps platform, specifically, Google Sites.

The LSNC Shared Portal demo’d but not successfully displayed during the presentation is itself not part of Google Sites. The portal is itself a point-of-entry front end built on a WordPress PHP installation, and designed to complement our Pika 4.0 installation, which is also a PHP application. The portal is a point-of-entry but not a strictly controlled one, in the sense that users are not required to go through it to access either Pika or their Google Apps. But the portal is a custom user-interface that affords our users quick, efficient access to all the core web-based applications they need to do their work, plus a program calendar and a slew of LSNC-specific newsfeeds. And then there is the portal’s killer app: The enterprise search box, the findability trigger that searches all of the valued, useful, usable shared content. The enterprise search box initially gives you what I described in the session as “horizontal” search; at the (poorly displayed) search result page our users then have access to “vertical” filtering options.

And, as illustrated with the search for my personnel information and photo, our users can use the enterprise search box to do special data queries to get specially tailored search results. For example, when I did the demo search for “staff brian,” here’s what was basically happening: Triggered by the keyword “staff,” the Google Search Appliance (GSA) activates a OneBox module that did a query of our Pika CMS database, returned that query result as XML, which in turn was processed through XSLT and output for display as HTML.

The other private content areas I described are all now, or soon will be, part of our domain’s Google Sites. All of our organization’s “official” intranet content is now positioned at a Google Sites location, as is our new “shared document repository.” The GSA works very well with the Google Apps platform, and natively integrates with Google Analytics, among other things. Great stuff.

SharePoint issues

My observation at the beginning of my segment that LSNC was the first legal services field program to adopt the Google Apps platform and the first to abandon SharePoint was not intended to be provocative. It was intended to be transparent about what we are doing and why. Unfortunately, I never got around to explaining our organization’s views on SharePoint.

The short version is this: Given what we want and need to do with our shared work and collaboration space, we simply no longer see any advantages to using SharePoint. Zero. Zip. Nada. At launch of The Findability Project we viewed SharePoint as a key component for hosting and building and sharing content. And SharePoint is a great option for that. It is a very impressive product. But about six months into The Findability Project, Google unleashed Google Sites as part of the Google Apps platform, and for us it was a game changer. Google Apps is free (for non-profits, for the foreseeable future), we don’t have to host, maintain, secure, update or fix it, and Google continues to aggressively improve its features, along with everything else within Google Apps. And we are able to do pretty much everything we need to be able to do with it. True, SharePoint has an enormous mindshare within corporate America. And organizations do need to evaluate whether SharePoint has features or functionality that are unique or indispensible to it. For us, it has none.

Oh, and did I mention that the GSA works natively with Google Apps?

While not the reasons why we have bailed out on SharePoint, there are these views questioning what role SharePoint has in your future: Peter Campbell’s article, Why SharePoint Scares Me; and more contrariness from Dion Hichcliffe, Sharepoint and Enterprise 2.0: The good, the bad, and the ugly.

More self-criticism: What we don’t like about our user interface

Perhaps I spent too much time trying to drive home the importance of usability as a concept and how it relates to findability. I am fascinated by usability concepts and, after now years of practical experience, sobered by the reality of how challenging it is to do well. We are very pleased with what we have accomplished with our portal (and related search result page and Pika CMS) designs shown in the slides. But I also had planned on taking a few minutes to highlight what are remaining problems with our design, and “usability” thoughts about improving or fixing them. For example, we already plan on altering how we use tags as part of the portal page, and will soon be modifying the vertical filtering options on the enterprise search result page, to expand those options and make them more intuitive. I think we have done good. I think we can do better. And we will.

Knowledge management as poetry

I wasn’t entirely irresponsible about keeping within my allotted time. One thing I considered doing but dropped from my presentation to save time, was my giving a dramatic reading of the most famous poem ever about knowledge management. Yes, there is such a thing:

“The Unknown” by Donald Rumsfeld

As we know,
There are known knowns.
There are things we know we know.
We also know
There are known unknowns.
That is to say
We know there are some things
We do not know.
But there are also unknown unknowns,
The ones we don’t know
We don’t know.

[U.S. Department of Defense news briefing, February 12, 2002]

As far as I can tell, this was someone who never actually grasped basic concepts of findability.

But that’s me. What do I know.