Knowledge Mapping: Expiring content & Taxonomy counts #mapping #content-management #taxonomy


Jay Kreshel
 

I have begun a Knowledge Mapping exercise and have learned a couple of things about my data that I need help managing. 
  1. We have a lot of really good content. But, when we posted it to our Content Management Systems, we failed to document its post dates... AND, as we work through determining which content will help us engage our employees and customers at the right time. When it is time to add new content, what is the best practice on expiring content and when to remove it from the system?
  2. With our taxonomy of labels for tracking and tagging data, we have a list of 130 individual labels across 18 categories. Feels like a lot... What is the Best Practice for a reasonable count?
  3. I was also given guidance around a Controlled Vocabulary as an alternative. I believe that this would decrease the number of categories and categories. Does anyone have a case study that would help me determine which method to use?
Thanks in advance.

Jay.
(300 person start-up, Technology company.)


Dennis Thomas
 

My comments:  [DLT]

1.  This is a judgment call.  The retention period is relative to who uses the material and its time-value. 

2.  No idea.  The general rule is whatever works.  Every situation is different.  There is, however, a point of diminishing returns.  At some point, the process becomes too cumbersome and people will not use it.

3.  See attached diagram of a knowledge acquisition study that was completed for the US Government.  It’s goal was to define what knowledge existed within the Science & Technology labs.  The study used Controlled Vocabularies to insure accuracy.  It was determined that much of the research knowledge could not be understood by the Program Managers and it was therefore, not implemented in end-user projects.   For this reason, associating Acronyms, Synonyms, jargon with the Controlled Vocabularies was essential. People understand based on the language they already know and understand. 

Martha Nawrocki, our Master Knowledge Engineer modeled this project.  The Map was created by Dr. Richard L. Ballard, Principle Investigator

Good luck with your report.  Dennis 



On May 25, 2021 at 1:33:18 AM, Jay Kreshel (jkreshel@...) wrote:

I have begun a Knowledge Mapping exercise and have learned a couple of things about my data that I need help managing. 
  1. We have a lot of really good content. But, when we posted it to our Content Management Systems, we failed to document its post dates... AND, as we work through determining which content will help us engage our employees and customers at the right time. When it is time to add new content, what is the best practice on expiring content and when to remove it from the system?
  2. With our taxonomy of labels for tracking and tagging data, we have a list of 130 individual labels across 18 categories. Feels like a lot... What is the Best Practice for a reasonable count?
  3. I was also given guidance around a Controlled Vocabulary as an alternative. I believe that this would decrease the number of categories and categories. Does anyone have a case study that would help me determine which method to use?
Thanks in advance.

Jay.
(300 person start-up, Technology company.)


Stephen Bounds
 

Hi Jay,

Dennis has pretty much nailed it.

On point 1, you need to consider: (a) the cost of leaving something 'wrong' up and (b) if something 'wrong' could still be useful. One option to consider is applying automatic warning headers on content that is at more than X days old to encourage people to look for newer content. This also encourages relevant content to be refreshed by stakeholders (even if people just click Edit => Save to update the modified date).

On point 2, assuming that the main purpose of labels is discovery, you could analyse the number of times a label is searched for to get a sense for which are resonating with your users and then trimming the excess. But first I think you need to understand why you're labelling content at all. Is it performing a function that search won't and if so, could you fix the problem with a better search engine? 😁

Patrick Lambe's book "Organising Knowledge: Taxonomies, Knowledge and Organisational Effectiveness" is a great way to learn about this stuff, BTW. Highly recommend.

Cheers,
Stephen.

====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 25/05/2021 9:33 pm, Dennis Thomas wrote:

My comments:  [DLT]

1.  This is a judgment call.  The retention period is relative to who uses the material and its time-value. 

2.  No idea.  The general rule is whatever works.  Every situation is different.  There is, however, a point of diminishing returns.  At some point, the process becomes too cumbersome and people will not use it.

3.  See attached diagram of a knowledge acquisition study that was completed for the US Government.  It’s goal was to define what knowledge existed within the Science & Technology labs.  The study used Controlled Vocabularies to insure accuracy.  It was determined that much of the research knowledge could not be understood by the Program Managers and it was therefore, not implemented in end-user projects.   For this reason, associating Acronyms, Synonyms, jargon with the Controlled Vocabularies was essential. People understand based on the language they already know and understand. 

Martha Nawrocki, our Master Knowledge Engineer modeled this project.  The Map was created by Dr. Richard L. Ballard, Principle Investigator

Good luck with your report.  Dennis 



On May 25, 2021 at 1:33:18 AM, Jay Kreshel (jkreshel@...) wrote:

I have begun a Knowledge Mapping exercise and have learned a couple of things about my data that I need help managing. 
  1. We have a lot of really good content. But, when we posted it to our Content Management Systems, we failed to document its post dates... AND, as we work through determining which content will help us engage our employees and customers at the right time. When it is time to add new content, what is the best practice on expiring content and when to remove it from the system?
  2. With our taxonomy of labels for tracking and tagging data, we have a list of 130 individual labels across 18 categories. Feels like a lot... What is the Best Practice for a reasonable count?
  3. I was also given guidance around a Controlled Vocabulary as an alternative. I believe that this would decrease the number of categories and categories. Does anyone have a case study that would help me determine which method to use?
Thanks in advance.

Jay.
(300 person start-up, Technology company.)


Jay Kreshel
 

Thanks, @Steven, I have been referred to Patrick Lambe's writings before. I will check it out...

If as you say my issue may not be tagged at all and an improved Search functionality is advisable... Can you please recommend one or a few to review? I keep hearing from everyone that KM is about the process and not technology, but it seems as if I am starting to run into a corner where it may be the solution.

Jay.


On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 6:06 AM Stephen Bounds <km@...> wrote:

Hi Jay,

Dennis has pretty much nailed it.

On point 1, you need to consider: (a) the cost of leaving something 'wrong' up and (b) if something 'wrong' could still be useful. One option to consider is applying automatic warning headers on content that is at more than X days old to encourage people to look for newer content. This also encourages relevant content to be refreshed by stakeholders (even if people just click Edit => Save to update the modified date).

On point 2, assuming that the main purpose of labels is discovery, you could analyse the number of times a label is searched for to get a sense for which are resonating with your users and then trimming the excess. But first I think you need to understand why you're labelling content at all. Is it performing a function that search won't and if so, could you fix the problem with a better search engine? 😁

Patrick Lambe's book "Organising Knowledge: Taxonomies, Knowledge and Organisational Effectiveness" is a great way to learn about this stuff, BTW. Highly recommend.

Cheers,
Stephen.

====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 25/05/2021 9:33 pm, Dennis Thomas wrote:
My comments:  [DLT]

1.  This is a judgment call.  The retention period is relative to who uses the material and its time-value. 

2.  No idea.  The general rule is whatever works.  Every situation is different.  There is, however, a point of diminishing returns.  At some point, the process becomes too cumbersome and people will not use it.

3.  See attached diagram of a knowledge acquisition study that was completed for the US Government.  It’s goal was to define what knowledge existed within the Science & Technology labs.  The study used Controlled Vocabularies to insure accuracy.  It was determined that much of the research knowledge could not be understood by the Program Managers and it was therefore, not implemented in end-user projects.   For this reason, associating Acronyms, Synonyms, jargon with the Controlled Vocabularies was essential. People understand based on the language they already know and understand. 

Martha Nawrocki, our Master Knowledge Engineer modeled this project.  The Map was created by Dr. Richard L. Ballard, Principle Investigator

Good luck with your report.  Dennis 



On May 25, 2021 at 1:33:18 AM, Jay Kreshel (jkreshel@...) wrote:

I have begun a Knowledge Mapping exercise and have learned a couple of things about my data that I need help managing. 
  1. We have a lot of really good content. But, when we posted it to our Content Management Systems, we failed to document its post dates... AND, as we work through determining which content will help us engage our employees and customers at the right time. When it is time to add new content, what is the best practice on expiring content and when to remove it from the system?
  2. With our taxonomy of labels for tracking and tagging data, we have a list of 130 individual labels across 18 categories. Feels like a lot... What is the Best Practice for a reasonable count?
  3. I was also given guidance around a Controlled Vocabulary as an alternative. I believe that this would decrease the number of categories and categories. Does anyone have a case study that would help me determine which method to use?
Thanks in advance.

Jay.
(300 person start-up, Technology company.)


Tim Powell
 

Good questions, Jay!  Our answers here will be somewhat generic, given the inevitable limitations of what you are able you tell us in a public forum such as this.  That said, here, in order, are my thoughts:

 

  1. All knowledge begins to age as soon as it’s converted into information in a CMS.  In a fast-moving industry such as yours, some information is obsolete within a matter of hours.  It’s key to have such content dated, so the user can make his/her own decision as to how relevant it is to his/her business need.  It’s also key to have content attributed, so the true knowledge – which is human-centric – can be accessed for currency and greater depth.  CMS content should be thought of as an index to the true knowledge base of the company.  Re purge cycles, you can usually judge from usage data whether information is still useful.
  2. The number of categories I think is not so important as the business relevance and accessibility of the information.  “The magic  number 7 +/- 2” is a good guidepost for busy and overloaded users.  If you get much beyond that, you’re stretching the cognitive boundaries of the human “machine.”  It’s key here to get input from your users/clients – who will know a lot more about their needs than we “experts” will. 
  3. Smaller companies (like yours) may have different needs than large, less dynamic enterprises.  You might find this article on metrics for venture-backed firms helpful:  https://growth.georgian.io/c/g7-the-seven-saas-me?x=gYRF2j&utm_campaign=May+2021+-+Newsletter&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=128740944&_hsenc=p2ANqtz--ri_P1-xywGAhQ0Wovh1rCXut10kmF5NGGjOjb0s0WElaFx53_1kLPa0nN0CqjK6uIZtZ0iQ5c_jxq-QGvHlZWMYDMr9j38smehMp_34hifKkx_3E&utm_content=128740703&utm_source=hs_email

 

Good luck, hope this helps you,

 

Tim

 

TIM WOOD POWELL | President, The Knowledge Agency® | Author, The Value of Knowledge |

New York City, USA  |  TEL +1.212.243.1200 | 

SITE www.KnowledgeAgency.com | BLOG www.KnowledgeValueChain.com |

 

 

From: <main@SIKM.groups.io> on behalf of Jay Kreshel <jkreshel@...>
Reply-To: "main@SIKM.groups.io" <main@SIKM.groups.io>
Date: Tuesday, May 25, 2021 at 1:33 AM
To: "main@SIKM.groups.io" <main@SIKM.groups.io>
Subject: [SIKM] Knowledge Mapping: Expiring content & Taxonomy counts

 

I have begun a Knowledge Mapping exercise and have learned a couple of things about my data that I need help managing. 

1.       We have a lot of really good content. But, when we posted it to our Content Management Systems, we failed to document its post dates... AND, as we work through determining which content will help us engage our employees and customers at the right time. When it is time to add new content, what is the best practice on expiring content and when to remove it from the system?

2.       With our taxonomy of labels for tracking and tagging data, we have a list of 130 individual labels across 18 categories. Feels like a lot... What is the Best Practice for a reasonable count?

3.       I was also given guidance around a Controlled Vocabulary as an alternative. I believe that this would decrease the number of categories and categories. Does anyone have a case study that would help me determine which method to use?

Thanks in advance.

Jay.
(300 person start-up, Technology company.)


 

Managing content in general requires overhead activity. Doing it well requires discipline and extra work that most knowledge workers balk at doing. Taxonomies are a PITA to establish and maintain and use beyond the top-level, except for engineering or R&D organizations, where universal terminology is industry-wide, and much easier to manage and implement. 

People know where the good stuff is. They know which stuff is still relevant, and which stuff is out of date or superseded. Domain experts generally are aware of the good stuff in their domain, so one way to organize content is to more deliberately identify and track experts and make it easier for people to find them. And perhaps offer help to them in terms of structuring the good stuff in a more organized, standardized way. Maybe hosted on a searchable platform/portal. 

OK. So there’s my KM heresy for the day. :-)
--
-Tom
--

Tom Short Consulting
TSC
+1 415 300 7457

All of my previous SIKM Posts


Stephen Bounds
 

Hi Jay,

Honestly, almost all full-text search engines are perfectly fine. Until you get to millions of documents there is minimal difference in performance and effectiveness.

Categorisation tends to be seen as a good option due to its high efficiency in locating information with medium numbers of documents, as illustrated by the chart below:

This makes some pretty basic assumptions about user behaviour and the crossover points in efficiency will change depending on those assumptions but the basic idea holds.

However, what this chart does not capture is the cost of applying the categorisation in the first place. The benefit of search is that it is literally "set and forget" - the cost of capturing thousands of additional documents is minimal compared to hand-tagging each. Thus people tend to overvalue categorisation and undervalue search. Applying metadata for the sole purpose of location only makes sense when dealing with a small number of documents with a relatively frequent and valuable amount of reuse.

(Note of caution: Don't forget whole-of-lifecycle governance. If you're going to end up with a pile of unowned documents in your system, it can be costly to identify people responsible for their later review. Ideally documents should be tagged with an identifiable group owner at point of upload if you need to delegate their subsequent management or disposal. Usernames are a poor substitute but better than nothing.)

Cheers,
Stephen.

====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 26/05/2021 12:18 am, Jay Kreshel wrote:

Thanks, @Steven, I have been referred to Patrick Lambe's writings before. I will check it out...

If as you say my issue may not be tagged at all and an improved Search functionality is advisable... Can you please recommend one or a few to review? I keep hearing from everyone that KM is about the process and not technology, but it seems as if I am starting to run into a corner where it may be the solution.

Jay.


On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 6:06 AM Stephen Bounds <km@...> wrote:

Hi Jay,

Dennis has pretty much nailed it.

On point 1, you need to consider: (a) the cost of leaving something 'wrong' up and (b) if something 'wrong' could still be useful. One option to consider is applying automatic warning headers on content that is at more than X days old to encourage people to look for newer content. This also encourages relevant content to be refreshed by stakeholders (even if people just click Edit => Save to update the modified date).

On point 2, assuming that the main purpose of labels is discovery, you could analyse the number of times a label is searched for to get a sense for which are resonating with your users and then trimming the excess. But first I think you need to understand why you're labelling content at all. Is it performing a function that search won't and if so, could you fix the problem with a better search engine? 😁

Patrick Lambe's book "Organising Knowledge: Taxonomies, Knowledge and Organisational Effectiveness" is a great way to learn about this stuff, BTW. Highly recommend.

Cheers,
Stephen.

====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 25/05/2021 9:33 pm, Dennis Thomas wrote:
My comments:  [DLT]

1.  This is a judgment call.  The retention period is relative to who uses the material and its time-value. 

2.  No idea.  The general rule is whatever works.  Every situation is different.  There is, however, a point of diminishing returns.  At some point, the process becomes too cumbersome and people will not use it.

3.  See attached diagram of a knowledge acquisition study that was completed for the US Government.  It’s goal was to define what knowledge existed within the Science & Technology labs.  The study used Controlled Vocabularies to insure accuracy.  It was determined that much of the research knowledge could not be understood by the Program Managers and it was therefore, not implemented in end-user projects.   For this reason, associating Acronyms, Synonyms, jargon with the Controlled Vocabularies was essential. People understand based on the language they already know and understand. 

Martha Nawrocki, our Master Knowledge Engineer modeled this project.  The Map was created by Dr. Richard L. Ballard, Principle Investigator

Good luck with your report.  Dennis 



On May 25, 2021 at 1:33:18 AM, Jay Kreshel (jkreshel@...) wrote:

I have begun a Knowledge Mapping exercise and have learned a couple of things about my data that I need help managing. 
  1. We have a lot of really good content. But, when we posted it to our Content Management Systems, we failed to document its post dates... AND, as we work through determining which content will help us engage our employees and customers at the right time. When it is time to add new content, what is the best practice on expiring content and when to remove it from the system?
  2. With our taxonomy of labels for tracking and tagging data, we have a list of 130 individual labels across 18 categories. Feels like a lot... What is the Best Practice for a reasonable count?
  3. I was also given guidance around a Controlled Vocabulary as an alternative. I believe that this would decrease the number of categories and categories. Does anyone have a case study that would help me determine which method to use?
Thanks in advance.

Jay.
(300 person start-up, Technology company.)


Maria Svoisky Goldberg
 

My 2 cents:
1. In my last role we came up with a formula I collaboration with data scientists that looks at parameters such as last updated date,  negative feedback,  usage. We tweaked it a couple of times to assign the right weight to each parameter, and got to a point where we get a list of recommendations for review. This list is distributed among SMEs periodically  and they decide whether the articles need to be retired. 
We also reviewe the recommendations and aske data scientists to feed the recommendations back into the model and adjust it according to results. 

2. I don't think there is a best practice here. If your platform is complex and you have many products for example,  you can easily have a very big and  branchy taxonomy tree. 
I would work with the SMEs and end users of the taxonomy to validate the values and see if it resonates with them. 

Hope this helps!
Maria


On Tue, May 25, 2021, 4:34 AM Dennis Thomas <dlthomas@...> wrote:
My comments:  [DLT]

1.  This is a judgment call.  The retention period is relative to who uses the material and its time-value. 

2.  No idea.  The general rule is whatever works.  Every situation is different.  There is, however, a point of diminishing returns.  At some point, the process becomes too cumbersome and people will not use it.

3.  See attached diagram of a knowledge acquisition study that was completed for the US Government.  It’s goal was to define what knowledge existed within the Science & Technology labs.  The study used Controlled Vocabularies to insure accuracy.  It was determined that much of the research knowledge could not be understood by the Program Managers and it was therefore, not implemented in end-user projects.   For this reason, associating Acronyms, Synonyms, jargon with the Controlled Vocabularies was essential. People understand based on the language they already know and understand. 

Martha Nawrocki, our Master Knowledge Engineer modeled this project.  The Map was created by Dr. Richard L. Ballard, Principle Investigator

Good luck with your report.  Dennis 



On May 25, 2021 at 1:33:18 AM, Jay Kreshel (jkreshel@...) wrote:

I have begun a Knowledge Mapping exercise and have learned a couple of things about my data that I need help managing. 
  1. We have a lot of really good content. But, when we posted it to our Content Management Systems, we failed to document its post dates... AND, as we work through determining which content will help us engage our employees and customers at the right time. When it is time to add new content, what is the best practice on expiring content and when to remove it from the system?
  2. With our taxonomy of labels for tracking and tagging data, we have a list of 130 individual labels across 18 categories. Feels like a lot... What is the Best Practice for a reasonable count?
  3. I was also given guidance around a Controlled Vocabulary as an alternative. I believe that this would decrease the number of categories and categories. Does anyone have a case study that would help me determine which method to use?
Thanks in advance.

Jay.
(300 person start-up, Technology company.)


Keith De La Rue
 

Jay - 

In response to your point 1 - we developed a process to manage content currency in my work at Telstra. While our content may have been in a different context to yours, some of our approach may be useful. We had an online content library (using Lotus Notes/Domino) containing telecommunications product information (on complex voice, data and other products and services). This was mostly written by product managers, with the primary audience being the business and government sales force. 

In this context, currency of the content was critical - giving out-of-date information to a customer could have severe legal and regulatory consequences. On the issue of expiry, we had an agreement between senior product and sales management that all entries in the library must be updated at least every 90 days. We developed workflow tools to manage this.

A key element was that every entry in the library (which may be a document, spreadsheet, presentation, audio or video file, or even a link or a text item) must include the name of its author. That author would then be responsible for the 90-day reviews. My team also managed the process - if an author had moved on, we would get the error message from the workflow and follow up with the relevant manager. We found that this element of ownership was critical for keeping content up to date.

Every entry also provided messaging for the audience - anyone could directly contact the responsible author with any questions or feedback.

I documented this process in a chapter in the book TIMAF Information Management Best Practices – Volume 1. This chapter is available on my website here: 

http://delarue.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/03KeithDeLaRue.pdf

-------------------------
Keith De La Rue
AcKnowledge Consulting
...acting on knowledge, communication and learning
email: keith@...
phone: +61 418 51 7676
blog: http://acknowledgeconsulting.com/

 


Stephen Bounds
 

Hi Tatiana,

I wasn't sure if it would be of broader interest to the community, so I didn't include it in my earlier post.

Yes, it's my own work. I created a pretty simplistic cost-assessment projection as described in the "algorithm" for each line of the chart. Happy to answer any questions that you or others have.

Cheers,
Stephen.

====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 28/05/2021 9:46 pm, Tata Gudilina wrote:

Hi Stephen,

I apologise for joining the conversation without introduction or invitation. However, I’m very interested in findings re document location methods efficiency on the chart that you shared. Is it part of your own research results? Could you please share any additional info on the source of info? I failed to google it on my own

Thank you in advance
Tatiana


On 28 May 2021, at 02:08, Stephen Bounds <km@...> wrote:



Hi Jay,

Honestly, almost all full-text search engines are perfectly fine. Until you get to millions of documents there is minimal difference in performance and effectiveness.

Categorisation tends to be seen as a good option due to its high efficiency in locating information with medium numbers of documents, as illustrated by the chart below:

<knmnljjcecfmimek.png>

This makes some pretty basic assumptions about user behaviour and the crossover points in efficiency will change depending on those assumptions but the basic idea holds.

However, what this chart does not capture is the cost of applying the categorisation in the first place. The benefit of search is that it is literally "set and forget" - the cost of capturing thousands of additional documents is minimal compared to hand-tagging each. Thus people tend to overvalue categorisation and undervalue search. Applying metadata for the sole purpose of location only makes sense when dealing with a small number of documents with a relatively frequent and valuable amount of reuse.

(Note of caution: Don't forget whole-of-lifecycle governance. If you're going to end up with a pile of unowned documents in your system, it can be costly to identify people responsible for their later review. Ideally documents should be tagged with an identifiable group owner at point of upload if you need to delegate their subsequent management or disposal. Usernames are a poor substitute but better than nothing.)

Cheers,
Stephen.

====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 26/05/2021 12:18 am, Jay Kreshel wrote:
Thanks, @Steven, I have been referred to Patrick Lambe's writings before. I will check it out...

If as you say my issue may not be tagged at all and an improved Search functionality is advisable... Can you please recommend one or a few to review? I keep hearing from everyone that KM is about the process and not technology, but it seems as if I am starting to run into a corner where it may be the solution.

Jay.


On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 6:06 AM Stephen Bounds <km@...> wrote:

Hi Jay,

Dennis has pretty much nailed it.

On point 1, you need to consider: (a) the cost of leaving something 'wrong' up and (b) if something 'wrong' could still be useful. One option to consider is applying automatic warning headers on content that is at more than X days old to encourage people to look for newer content. This also encourages relevant content to be refreshed by stakeholders (even if people just click Edit => Save to update the modified date).

On point 2, assuming that the main purpose of labels is discovery, you could analyse the number of times a label is searched for to get a sense for which are resonating with your users and then trimming the excess. But first I think you need to understand why you're labelling content at all. Is it performing a function that search won't and if so, could you fix the problem with a better search engine? 😁

Patrick Lambe's book "Organising Knowledge: Taxonomies, Knowledge and Organisational Effectiveness" is a great way to learn about this stuff, BTW. Highly recommend.

Cheers,
Stephen.

====================================
Stephen Bounds
Executive, Information Management
Cordelta
E: stephen.bounds@...
M: 0401 829 096
====================================
On 25/05/2021 9:33 pm, Dennis Thomas wrote:
My comments:  [DLT]

1.  This is a judgment call.  The retention period is relative to who uses the material and its time-value. 

2.  No idea.  The general rule is whatever works.  Every situation is different.  There is, however, a point of diminishing returns.  At some point, the process becomes too cumbersome and people will not use it.

3.  See attached diagram of a knowledge acquisition study that was completed for the US Government.  It’s goal was to define what knowledge existed within the Science & Technology labs.  The study used Controlled Vocabularies to insure accuracy.  It was determined that much of the research knowledge could not be understood by the Program Managers and it was therefore, not implemented in end-user projects.   For this reason, associating Acronyms, Synonyms, jargon with the Controlled Vocabularies was essential. People understand based on the language they already know and understand. 

Martha Nawrocki, our Master Knowledge Engineer modeled this project.  The Map was created by Dr. Richard L. Ballard, Principle Investigator

Good luck with your report.  Dennis 



On May 25, 2021 at 1:33:18 AM, Jay Kreshel (jkreshel@...) wrote:

I have begun a Knowledge Mapping exercise and have learned a couple of things about my data that I need help managing. 
  1. We have a lot of really good content. But, when we posted it to our Content Management Systems, we failed to document its post dates... AND, as we work through determining which content will help us engage our employees and customers at the right time. When it is time to add new content, what is the best practice on expiring content and when to remove it from the system?
  2. With our taxonomy of labels for tracking and tagging data, we have a list of 130 individual labels across 18 categories. Feels like a lot... What is the Best Practice for a reasonable count?
  3. I was also given guidance around a Controlled Vocabulary as an alternative. I believe that this would decrease the number of categories and categories. Does anyone have a case study that would help me determine which method to use?
Thanks in advance.

Jay.
(300 person start-up, Technology company.)


Jay Kreshel
 

Keith. Thank you for your note and especially this article/chapter. I picked up several key and valuable lessons that I will be able to employ within my strategy. Specifically, I have identified these supplemental approaches that I can use:
  • Content Findability Tool to get to the content we need at the time we need it: Taxonomy, Search, Feed, Shareable
  • Product Development Approach that includes the delivery of initial training to customer-facing organizations

  • Existing content taxonomy review with potential to be simplified, signed off, and shared wide

  • Creation and adherence to a Content Review cycle to ensure content is fresh, updated, and accurately maintained

  • Content upload templates to ensure that content is standardized for upload and consumption: Overview, Author names, Dates of entry, tags, audiences

  • Push Knowledge Share solution where content is shared with audience via LMS or Intranet that is curated and shared

  • Regular Knowledge Assessments that check-in on the learning of the customer-facing audiences on a regular cadence

  • Consistent Knowledge sharing efforts with weekly internal webinars (delivered and captured), that are curated from community discussions


My still open questions include: What Findability / Search tools are you using to make this happen? 


Jay.


On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 11:41 PM Keith De La Rue <keith@...> wrote:
Jay - 

In response to your point 1 - we developed a process to manage content currency in my work at Telstra. While our content may have been in a different context to yours, some of our approach may be useful. We had an online content library (using Lotus Notes/Domino) containing telecommunications product information (on complex voice, data and other products and services). This was mostly written by product managers, with the primary audience being the business and government sales force. 

In this context, currency of the content was critical - giving out-of-date information to a customer could have severe legal and regulatory consequences. On the issue of expiry, we had an agreement between senior product and sales management that all entries in the library must be updated at least every 90 days. We developed workflow tools to manage this.

A key element was that every entry in the library (which may be a document, spreadsheet, presentation, audio or video file, or even a link or a text item) must include the name of its author. That author would then be responsible for the 90-day reviews. My team also managed the process - if an author had moved on, we would get the error message from the workflow and follow up with the relevant manager. We found that this element of ownership was critical for keeping content up to date.

Every entry also provided messaging for the audience - anyone could directly contact the responsible author with any questions or feedback.

I documented this process in a chapter in the book TIMAF Information Management Best Practices – Volume 1. This chapter is available on my website here: 

http://delarue.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/03KeithDeLaRue.pdf

-------------------------
Keith De La Rue
AcKnowledge Consulting
...acting on knowledge, communication and learning
email: keith@...
phone: +61 418 51 7676
blog: http://acknowledgeconsulting.com/

 


Keith De La Rue
 

Jay -
 
Thanks for the summary - glad you found the chapter to be of use!
 
The technology we were using at the time only had a fairly basic text search function (Lotus Notes/Domino). As per the description in the chapter, we tried to keep the taxonomy as simple and audience-focused as possible to aid findability, but the search was heavily used. A more sophisticated search would have been better!
 
After I left the company, the library was migrated to SharePoint, but I don’t know if the search was improved with this move. 

(For anyone who missed the earlier post, the book chapter mentioned is available at: http://delarue.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/03KeithDeLaRue.pdf.)

Regards,
 
 - Keith.
--------------------------------------------------------
Keith De La Rue
AcKnowledge Consulting
...acting on knowledge, communication and learning
email: keith@...
phone: +61 418 51 7676
blog: http://acknowledgeconsulting.com/
--------------------------------------------------------


Sharon Brennan
 
Edited

Keith and Jay
Yes the search was improved as we were able to add faceted search so users could refine by one the tags eg product, owner, content type such as video or brochure etc.