toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Matt, good post and totally agree with you!
Now for a new issue with enterprise search: my track at the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences has a minitrack on intentional forgetting. We are seeing that nothing is forgotten, even in enterprise search, even when the enterprise wants to forgot something. Why do we want to forget? Perhaps we tried a solution that failed so we want to remember the attempt but "forget" how to do it so we don't do it again. Or maybe we are changing the way our culture operates, we've seen this the last year and we have seen many people cancelled or in trouble because they remember and use the old culture when the enterprise is trying to forget that and move rapidly to a new culture. Tie this to Bruce's article on dealing with enterprise bullcrap and hopefully everyone can see my point about making sure enterprise search is pulling up the right stuff and not the long forgotten, out of date, or banned solutions!
From: Matt Moore <matt@...>
Sent: Tue, Mar 2, 2021 7:07 pm
Subject: Re: [SIKM] Enterprise search - defining standard measures and a universal KPI
I had a very similar conversation when I was at Panviva. This was a tool that documented workflows (esp. in contact centres).
Some of my colleagues said: “All organizational knowledge should be documented!”
My response was: “That sounds very, very expensive”
The amount of “controlled” knowledge you want to have will depend on the size, maturity and risk appetite of your organization. But generally it is between 0% and 100%.
This also links back to frameworks like Cynefin and the levels of knowledge control working in each domain requires.
Really, these aren’t questions about search but they are questions that search highlights. Enterprise search is a bit like turning on the light in a stoned teenagers bedroom. You may decide to clean things up. Or you may decide just to turn off the light.
+61 423 784 504
On Mar 3, 2021, at 11:42 AM, Stephen Bounds <km@...> wrote:
I think you've put your finger on an irreconcilable problem with Enterprise Search. In an organisation, we can divide our knowledge artefacts into three basic buckets:
Since "enterprise" search by its very definition assumes a single interface to access all three kinds of content, it's no wonder that users get confused about the purpose of results.
More to your point, I agree that it makes sense to have a class of corporate knowledge that is unambiguously definitive, because you want people to act as part of the whole, not individually. But removing all autonomy in knowledge search is a very "command and control" mentality and pretty brave in a world where localised knowledge assessment and decision-making is pretty-well agreed to be a more resilient option.Cheers,
==================================== Stephen Bounds Executive, Information Management Cordelta E: stephen.bounds@... M: 0401 829 096 ====================================