Articles by Month: October 2005

Let go of an obsession with intranet content quality

I'm sitting in today on an intranet conference today, and I've now heard three different talks about improving content quality on intranets. In particular:

• developing content standards and guidelines
• industry standards and guidelines
• "inverted pyramid" writing style
• training intranet authors
• enforcing content standards

I just don't care. I've written before than not all content needs to be of equal quality. More importantly, with all the challenges involved in delivering an effective intranet, is this really where we want to be focusing our efforts?

When there are limited intranet resources, a too-small intranet team, and no content management system, should we be picking on authors about the quality of content? Should we be spending our time conducting 2 hour to 2 day training sessions for all of our (100+) intranet authors?

I would argue that this is just intranet teams focusing on the aspects that they are most comfortable with, a practical and manageable issue to address. But it's also irrelevant when there is a need to develop a real strategy to create an intranet that aligns the site with real staff and business needs.

So I say: let go of this obsession! I want to see presentations at intranet conferences about how to gain management support, on how to deliver new solutions, on how to meet the needs of specific staff groups. Not hour after hour on intranet content quality...

Posted by jamesr at 04:24 PM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets

Better Desktop

The Better Desktop project has released a set of usability videos, showing testing of Linux applications and operating system. To quote:

Better Desktop is a project dedicated to sharing usability data with Linux developers. Over the past year, we have conducted many usability tests on different parts of the KDE and GNOME desktops. We created this site to serve as a place where developers can watch videos of these tests. Here you will find over 200 videos of people using Mozilla Firefox, Evolution, Open Office, Banshee, F-Spot and other applications. All of these can be found in the data section of this site.

Now, I'm not particularly interested in the usability of Linux (I'm happy to let someone else think about this). What I am very interested to see is actual usability testing videos. These could be used as great examples in presentations and with organisations looking to learn more about usability. It's great to see some actually released into the public domain...

[Thanks to Frederico Oliveira.]

Posted by jamesr at 04:08 PM | Permalink
Categories: Usability & user-centered design

The evil wall of requirements

Scott Berkun has written an article about the "evil wall of requirements". To quote:

One of the things stupid people do is this: Person A (aka Mr. stupid) writes a requirements document. He makes it super detailed and 50 pages long. He then throws it blindly over a wall (thud!) to person B and says "Do this."

While this is specifically targeted at software development projects, I think it's equally relevant to the relationship between IT and the business during CMS selection processes.

Posted by jamesr at 03:38 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management

Enterprise Search Guidebook

Martin White has published a new report, the Enterprise Search Guidebook. These are my thoughts on the report:

Publishing content within an organisation is one thing, ensuring staff can find it when they need it is another. Organisations everywhere are realising the importance of having an effective search engine within the enterprise, one that searches not just the intranet but other information sources as well.

This guidebook is therefore very timely. Martin White has many decades of experience regarding search solutions, and this is apparent in the depth of information squeezed into this easy-to-read report. Martin provides a clear overview of the issues facing organisations, and the potential technology approaches. Guidance is given on identifying search requirements, and selecting suitable products.

Containing both search fundamentals and advanced topics, this report should be on hand for every team looking for a new search solution.

Posted by jamesr at 05:48 PM | Permalink
Categories:

IA Manifesto 2.0

Jess Mcmullin posts details on an IA Manifesto 2.0 that was created at the recent IA Retreat. For example:

1. we need bad theory (comes before good theory)

2. We will not discuss definitions.

3. What do we do with RSS?

4. We talk and talk about how to document ajax interactions... but not about what it means

5. Need to leave the website behind.

6. We will not discuss deliverables.

...

There's some excellent and interesting items on this list, and I think it nicely throws down the challenge to IA's everywhere...

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

McDonald's dips toe In blogging waters

Kevin Newcomb reports on McDonald's piloting of corporate blogging (within the organisation). To quote:

While the McDonald's Corporation has not jumped headfirst into blogging, it certainly is further along the path of acceptance than many companies of its size. Last week, the company began an internal program that introduced corporate blogs, available only on the corporate intranet, behind the firewall. While this is seen as a small first step, it's an important one in a company the size of McDonald's, said Steve Wilson, senior director of global Web communications for McDonalds. Wilson spoke to a crowd of bloggers and curious marketing folk at Monday's BlogOn social media summit in New York.

[Thanks to Toby Ward.]

Posted by jamesr at 10:56 AM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets, Weblogs

Global site navigation: not worthwhile?

Jared Spool has written a post discussing the value (or lack of) global site navigation. To quote:

Global navigation (versus local navigation) is often static on the site (meaning that it doesn't change from one page to the next). We know that most of the time, users come to the site with a specific goal in mind. Maybe they'll click on the global navigation on the home page (however, probably not, if the page is well designed). Then they'll never click on it again, because, after all, they are now looking for local information -- not global information.

Posted by jamesr at 10:06 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture

Is lab usability dead?

Peter Merholz has written a blog entry asking: is lab usability dead? To quote:

I would love it if we could simply put a stake into the practice of lab usability. It's run its course, and it's simply not well suited to truly measuring the effectiveness of designs in the modern era. Usability engineering was born of a simpler time. Before everyone was networked. When people used computers for Calculation (basic math, spreadsheets, etc.) and Creation (word processors, graphics programs), not Consumption and Communication. When someone could be expected to focus on a single task at hand for many minutes, if not hours on end. When people had one "program" running at a time.

Posted by jamesr at 07:51 PM | Permalink
Categories:

Intranet ROI

Toby Ward has written a blog entry on determining intranet ROI. To quote:

Everyone talks about ROI. Almost all companies want and demand ROI, but when it comes down to measurement, most roll over. Talk is cheap, intranets are not.

A 2003 study of 240 intranet managers and consultants undertaken by Prescient Digital Media revealed that only 6% of organizations undertake ongoing, specific measurement of the ROI of their intranet. Occasional measurement is undertaken by only 26% of organizations and 51% either do no measurement, don’t know if they do, or only guess at the ROI. 18% are considering ROI measurements.

Posted by jamesr at 07:33 PM | Permalink
Categories: Area Health Service project, Book & product reviews, Conferences & presentations, Content management, Design & usability guidelines, Document & records management, E-learning, Information architecture, Information management, Interface design, Intranets, Intranets, James' articles, Knowledge management, Metrics & ROI, Search tools, Usability & user-centered design, Web development, Weblogs, XML

The business case for WCM

Tony Byrne has written an article on creating a business case for content management. To quote:

At some point, someone will ask you to justify your Web content management system (WCMS) project. Fortunately, there is a business case to be made for a WCMS on both the cost and revenue sides of the ledger. If no one is requesting a business rationale and the project is proceeding regardless, reconsider your bearings. All major technology efforts beget tough decisions and difficult trade-offs, so it is best to have a business plan in place as a touchstone to keep the team focused-especially if your CFO will be writing big checks to outside vendors.

Posted by jamesr at 07:08 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management

Why personas don't gell

Michael Andrews writes a blog entry that raises further concerns about personas. To quote:

Personas can potentially address many aspects of users. Each of these facets may be important to how users relate to an interactive design. But often, these facets just don't cluster around common themes, despite our desire to group everyone into a few easily digested categories. The essential problem with the persona concept is that attributes of users don't predictably co-vary with each other.

As I said on his last post, I don't necessarily agree with everything written, but I'm still enjoying seeing some of our assumed "best-practice" techniques heathily challenged...

Posted by jamesr at 10:08 PM | Permalink
Categories:

Weblog usability: the top ten design mistakes

Jakob Nielsen has written an article on the usability of weblogs, providing some guidelines on better practices. To quote:

Descriptive headlines are especially important for representing your weblog in search engines, newsfeeds (RSS), and other external environments. In those contexts, users often see only the headline and use it to determine whether to click into the full posting. Even if users see a short abstract along with the headline (as with most search engines), user testing shows that people often read only the headline. In fact, people often read only the first three or four words of a headline when scanning a list of possible places to go.

Posted by jamesr at 09:58 PM | Permalink
Categories: Area Health Service project, Book & product reviews, Conferences & presentations, Content management, Design & usability guidelines, Document & records management, E-learning, Information architecture, Information management, Interface design, Intranets, James' articles, Knowledge management, Metrics & ROI, Search tools, Usability & user-centered design, Web development, Weblogs, Weblogs, XML

Decision-based design

Dan Brown has written a blog entry on what he is calling decision-based design, as applied to content management. To quote:

One of the major conclusions of my work in content management theory is that systems designed to enforce decisions will fail. Consider a workflow system that forces users through the same process, regardless of circumstances. Invariably, situations arise where the basic workflow doesn't hold — authors are absent from work, editors don't have the right expertise to review a document, the content demands a new structure. Yet the majority of content management systems — indeed, most business systems — prevent humans from accommodating these scenarios because they are confined by the rules imposed by the computer.

I realized that computers should stick with what they're good at -- serving up information -- and humans should be allowed to do what they're good at -- making decisions about day-to-day situations. This is the essence of decision-based design.

Posted by jamesr at 10:32 AM | Permalink
Categories: Content management

Authority

Peter Morville has written an article on the subject of authority, and the impact of folksonomy. To quote:

In the good old days, not so long ago, in the context of the written word, authority was a term used primarily by librarians as a criteria of evaluation. Along with accuracy, objectivity, and currency, we judged source authority. Who is the author? Who is the publisher? What are their individual and institutional qualifications and reputations? Have the contents been edited and refereed? Is this an authoritative source?

But then, authority was appropriated by the Technorati mob, where it swiftly lost definition in a tangled tag soup of popularity, power, trust, credibility, and relevance. These words were tossed around indiscriminately in a Bacchanalian festival of semantic anarchy.

Posted by jamesr at 02:51 PM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture

Collaborative tagging: how networking sites connect people by interests and goals

Silverio Petruzzellis has written an article on collaborative tagging. To quote:

The organic growth of the web is bringing the issue of information categorization and retrieval upfront as never before. Publishing information is not an expensive activity anymore, both from a technical and a financial point of view, and loads of valuable independent editors contributes with their daily effort to the global knowledge by means of the new cultural weapons of weblogs and wikies. Internet users are constantly looking for new and adapting forms of categorization to help them structuring the overwhelming information flow that every day comes to their desktops.

Posted by jamesr at 11:17 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture

The promised land of prototyping

Henrik Olsen has written an article on the value of prototyping, when designing applications and websites. To quote:

The most important reason for building a prototype is to make sure that a product gets designed rather than left to chance. Designing is the art of making plans for how to create things, and experienced artists and craftspeople make plans before they create anything final. Painters draw sketches, car designers build vehicle models, and architects create blueprints and cardboard mock-ups.

To reject prototyping as an essential part of a development project can be compared to a builder depending on the workmen to think something up along the way instead of having an architect work out plans for the building.

Posted by jamesr at 10:25 AM | Permalink
Categories: Usability & user-centered design

Too fuzzy: personas and scenarios

Michael Andrews raised some concerns about personas and scenarios. To quote:

Personas and scenarios are meant to make an abstract, intangible interaction process more concrete. But more often than not, they fail miserably: offering a simplictic, waffly caricature of something that is complex and nuanced. I am beginning to think that both tools are more dangerous than useful, and give user centered design a bad name by pretending to be user centered when in reality these techniques rely on assumptions, distortions and conjectures.

I'm a great believer in this sort of debate, and I certainly don't think that the fields of usability and IA are sufficiently mature not to require these sorts of challenges. That being said, we've found both personas and scenarios to be very useful in a number of situations. We wrote an introduction to personas, and I've talked about the use of narrative in CMS tenders.

Posted by jamesr at 11:35 AM | Permalink
Categories: Usability & user-centered design

Ambient findability: findability hacks

Peter Morville has published an excerpt from his new book on findability hacks. To quote:

Seriously, findability is one of the most thorny problems in web design. This is due in part to the inherent ambiguity of semantics and structure. We label and categorize things in so many ways that retrieval is difficult at best. But that's only the half of it. The most formidable challenges stem from its cross-functional, interdisciplinary nature. Findability defies classification. It flows across the borders between design, engineering, and marketing. Everybody is responsible, and so we run the risk that nobody is accountable.

Posted by jamesr at 11:24 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information architecture

Usability and IA workshops (Adelaide)

I'm pleased to announce that we've organised a pair of workshops for Adelaide, as follows:

• Usability Testing Fundamentals (Wednesday, 30 November 2005)
• Information Architecture Fundamentals (Thursday, 1 December 2005)

We have been running these workshops for some time, and they provide an excellent introduction to the disciplines of usability and information architecture. Practical techniques are explored, including hands-on activities for participants. These workshops will be run by Iain Barker, who has over 10 years of experience in the industry.

Follow the links above for full workshop details and registration forms. Best yet, if you register for one workshop, you get a $100 discount on the other (along with an early-bird rate that closes on 7 November.)

Posted by jamesr at 10:56 AM | Permalink
Categories:

Wikipedia: style guide

Wikipedia has a very useful entry on style guides, listing a wide range of different style guides (primarily focusing on writing standards but also covering different areas). To quote:

Some organizations other than those above also produce style guides, either for internal or external use. For example, some communications or public relations departments of business and nonprofit organizations have guides for their publications, such as newsletters, news releases and Web sites. Also, organizations that advocate for minorities may set out what they believe to be more fair and correct language treatment.

[Thanks to Scott Abel.]

Posted by jamesr at 04:19 PM | Permalink
Categories:

CM Pros Australia Community

I'm really excited to announce the launch of the CM Pros Australia Community. This was formed on 20 September 2005, as a regional chapter of the international CM Pros organisation.

This group provides a much-needed forum for discussions to be held on content management issues, and all are welcome, including writers, editors, designers, web managers, integrators, deployment specialists, consultants, distributors and vendors (both open-source and proprietary). The forum is for networking, shared discussion and mutual learning.

The next meeting is in Melbourne on 17 October (see the website for details). From 2006, meetings will be in both Sydney and Melbourne.

If you are located in Australia, and have an interest in content management, add yourself to the mailing list to join the discussions and find out about future events.

(I'm a co-Chair of this group, along with David Warwick.)

Posted by jamesr at 09:27 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management

The 'open inbox'

Joann S. Lublin writes about the open inbox policy of corporate CEO's. To quote:

Open inboxes appear to be more the rule than the exception at many major corporations. In a survey for The Wall Street Journal conducted last month by the Business Roundtable, a Washington group representing heads of big businesses, 39 out of 44 companies responding said their CEOs personally answer staffers' emails.

Advocates say such a policy is a powerful leadership tool that can nip crises in the bud, boost morale, uncover new ideas, and cut through corporate red tape. In the post-Enron era of CEO accountability, reading employee email helps the boss appear hands-on and accessible.

Now this is interesting knowledge management in action...

Posted by jamesr at 09:08 PM | Permalink
Categories: Knowledge management

Web Essentials 2005 presentation

I was honoured to be invited to speak at the recent Web Essentials conference, alongside a constellation of international experts. My talk was on "Selecting a content management system", and I've uploaded the presentation to my blog for those that are interested.

Presentation (244kb PDF)

Posted by jamesr at 08:13 PM | Permalink
Categories: Conferences & presentations, Content management

JSR 283: Content Repository for Java Technology API Version 2.0

JSR-283 has been announced as a replacement specification for JSR-170, designed to provide greater functionality.

Since this JSR represents an enhancement of JSR-170, the same general goals apply to this JSR as to JSR-170 (from the JSR-170 proposal):

The aim is to produce a content repository API that provides an implementation independent way to access content bi-directionally on a granular level. A content repository is a high-level information management system that is a superset of traditional data repositories. A content repository implements content services such as: author based versioning, full textual searching, fine grained access control, content categorization and content event monitoring. It is these content services that differentiate a content repository from a data repository. Many of today's (web) applications interact with content repositories in various ways. This API proposes that content repositories have a dedicated, standard way of interaction with applications that deal with content. This API will focus on transactional read/write access, binary content (stream operations), textual content, full-text searching, filtering, observation, versioning, handling of hard and soft structured content.

[Thanks to Tony Byrne.]

Posted by jamesr at 12:25 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management

Intranets as a Business Tool (Sydney, December)

At best, corporate intranets can be valuable business tools that deliver tangible efficiency gains and business benefits. All too many intranets, however, are simply treated as publishing platforms, as dumping grounds for second-hand documents.

Ark Group Australia and Step Two Designs have come together to present a master class to address this issue and others. The intensive one day master class is called: Intranets as a business tool and will be held on Friday 2nd December 2005 in Sydney.

This interactive master class will explore how to drive intranets to their next phase of evolution, providing practical insights on how to reposition the intranet as a business tool.

Topics to be covered in this master class include:

• A new model of intranet evolution, explaining why intranets are the way they are
• Practical techniques for identifying staff and business needs
• Meaningful intranet goals, beyond just "providing staff with the information they need to do their jobs"
• Key technologies to support a more interactive intranet
• Leadership role of intranet teams, in driving intranet evolution and delivering business benefits.

For more information on early registration discounts go to www.ark-group.com or call 1 300 550 662.

Posted by jamesr at 11:54 AM | Permalink
Categories:

Marketing the intranet

Toby Ward has written a blog entry on the importance of marketing the intranet. To quote:

If you build it they will not come. Of course, there will always be the curious and keeners and those that inherently understand it, but an intranet firing at maximum value requires marketing. In a survey of 500+ intranet managers by Melcrum Research, the number four issue or challenge facing intranet managers was low take-up or usage (the number one issue was ownership/politics).

(For more marketing ideas, see my earlier article 34 ideas for promoting your intranet.)

Posted by jamesr at 12:07 PM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets

Eight problems with your firm's strategic plan

Hank M. Harris has written an article on problems with strategic planning. To quote:

I have seen many planning efforts involving a facilitator who knows nothing about the industry (for example, a generic management consultant) or one who knows too much (a former practitioner). For lack of a better approach, these facilitators run everyone through an academic model. The result is a hyperbole-laden mission statement and a dozen loftily written goals. Nowhere in the process did the participants adequately ask themselves how to gain a competitive advantage or produce results in the market. They have a strategic plan, but they have no strategy.

[Thanks to Shawn Callahan.]

Posted by jamesr at 11:53 AM | Permalink
Categories: Information management

Will your chosen CMS vendor go bust?

One of the greatest fears when selecting a new content management system (CMS) is that the vendor will go bust, leaving the purchaser without support or upgrades. While this is certainly an important risk to manage, more careful consideration must be made beyond just selecting a 'big' CMS vendor and hoping for the best.

This briefing outlines the issues, and presents some potential approaches for mitigating the risk that your chosen vendor will not survive.

Will your vendor go bust?

As indicated above, one risk that needs to be considered when selecting a CMS vendor is that they may not survive in the marketplace. If the vendor was to go bust, this would potentially remove a major (sole?) source of product support, as well as eliminating any chance of product upgrades or enhancements.

Should a bug be encountered, it would be difficult or impossible to get it addressed. At best, this may force inconvenient workarounds, or at worst, may shut down the sites published using the CMS.

[Read the full article.]

Posted by jamesr at 03:05 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management

Providing intranet access to records

Many organisations are attempting to clarify the relationship between the corporate intranet, and their document/records management system. While this is a broader issue of information management with an organisation, there are some short-term activities that can be taken to create a working relationship between these two platforms.

This briefing outlines a simple scenario in which the intranet helps staff find key corporate information, while the documents accessed are stored in the document/records management system.

Usage scenario

The following scenario outlines one of the typical ways an intranet is used:

A staff member browses into the HR section, and then to the 'HR policies' page. Scanning through the list of documents available, the leave policy is selected, and the PDF opens up in Acrobat Reader.

This is a very common scenario, but more could be happening behind the scenes than is apparent to the end user.

[Read the full article.]

Posted by jamesr at 02:07 PM | Permalink
Categories: Document & records management, Intranets, James' articles

Intranet change: evolution or big bang?

When planning improvements to an intranet, two main approaches can be taken: the 'big bang' and evolutionary approaches. The big bang approach involves making a single, site-wide change to the design and structure of the intranet as the old site is replaced by a new one. In contrast, the 'evolutionary' approach makes gradual changes over time, evolving the capabilities and design of the current intranet.

This article discusses the differences between the big bang and evolutionary approaches to intranet development. Guidelines are provided on when to use each approach, along with a range of practical tips and suggestions.

Is it time for a change?

Intranets are most successful when they align closely with both business and user needs. The earlier article, Five minute intranet self-evaluation, provides a range of criteria to assess the state of your current intranet. This can help determine the areas where your intranet could be improved.

Taking a big bang approach

The big bang approach involves replacing the current intranet with a new one. It is called the big bang because it seems to users that the change happens all at once.

The process for creating a new intranet will be familiar to many intranet managers. It usually starts with the creation (and approval) of a business case, which is followed by more detailed documentation of the requirements. Then a new intranet is designed to meet those requirements, and a suitable content management system (CMS) is selected. The new intranet is then built, and possibly integrated with other business systems. Finally, it is tested and ideally refined, before being launchd across the organisation. This process is accompanied by internal publicity efforts to inform staff of the launch and new features, and training to ensure they know how to use the new site.

[Read the full article, written by Sarah Owen.]

Posted by jamesr at 01:16 PM | Permalink
Categories: Intranets

Follow-on re: innovation in information management

My earlier post on the lack of innovation in information management has provoked a bit of interest. One email I received contained some excellent points that expanded on my theories about the causes of the low rate of innovation.

To quote:

IT departments are so focussed internally on projects that have frequently failed to deliver, so wrapped up in a desire to wrest control and power back to the centre, that they are not really watching, or even terribly interested, in the innovation that is going on in the wild wild west of the Internet. Even if they were aware, the last thing they want is untried and untested software from non-mainstream (i.e. not Microsoft) vendors threatening their precious infrastructure. Change is slow as the 'gatekeeping' function that has to happen before anything is allowed on the infrastructure is slow, bureaucratic and stifling. It does not encourage or motivate anyone to try anything new.

I thus believe, contrary to one of your observations, that it is not the culture in the organisation at large that is not innovative, as arguably the people at the 'coal face' are often eager to try out ideas and new tools that could significantly enhance the way they do their job. In fact, many of the new collaborative tools are genuinely enpowering, as they can enhance the social life of the organisation and assist people in providing mutual support despite time and distance barriers. It thus depends what you mean by 'culture' - if you are referring to the control culture engenderred by certain classes of senior management, and like-minded IT departments with who they interact, then perhaps that is a reasonale observation.

So in terms of solutions, I think organisations need to find a way of experimenting with these new technologies, developing innovative ways of using them to enhance organisational effectiveness, in a way that does not threaten the risk averse nature of the IT managers. Think of it as a safe IT 'play area' which should ideally be available to all who wish to take part, wherever they are in the organisation. One can think of ways that this could be done, for example by using VPN technologies to create compartmented tunnels that keep the experimental traffic away from the precious corporate blood vessels.

Keep those comments coming...

Posted by jamesr at 10:52 AM | Permalink
Categories:

Information management: where is the innovation?

I participated in the Web Essentials conference this week, and it was excellent. There was a real buzz in the air, with wild applause for speakers outlining the future of the web. While much of what was talking about may never come to fruition, there was still the strong sense that the web is entering into a new phase of innovation and rapid evolution.

It's the "Web 2.0" thing, rich Ajax-driven interfaces, social tagging, collaborative environments and new web-based applications. Many of these directions are still just coming together, with much discussion on blogs about what is really happening. That said, we are certainly starting to see new products, services and approaches coming to the web.

Listening to many of the speakers, I couldn't help but contrast the atmosphere of the conference to the various information management events I've participated in over the last year. The question that came strongly to mind was:

While the web in general is innovating, where is the innovation of information management?

Outside the organisation, much is happening. Inside the organisation, little has changed over the last 5 years, and there is no sign that anything much is happening now.

In general, "enterprise" (within the organisation) applications and approaches are slow moving, conservative and (let's face it) boring. Applications are rigid in their design, and few entirely new solutions have entered into the marketplace in the last few years.

This concerns me. A gap is widening between the management of information on the web, and the approaches used within the organisation, which can't be a good thing. Particularly if users are seeing successful (new) approaches on the web, and generally unsuccessful (old) approaches within organisations.

There are a few possible reasons why enterprise information management is lacking innovation:

• The web can call upon a large community of innovative coders, implementers and "early adopters" who will jump on any new ideas. This tiny percentage of the overall marketplace will then explore new approaches for quite some time before they gain wider adoption.
• This community of early adopters "self-selects" itself, while within organisations we are "stuck" with the employees we currently have.
• The culture within most organisations is generally very conservative (which in itself is potentially a problem in today's highly competitive marketplace).
• There are very different people involved in developing solutions on the web, and within organisations. Within organisations, many information management initiatives are driven by those coming out of generally quite conservative disciplines, such as library science and records management.
• Management of technology start-ups is very different to management within corporations. Perhaps within organisations, management just doesn't see the need to innovate information management, despite the very poor track record of success.

These are a just a few partially-formed ideas that came out of the WE05 conference. Maybe innovation just isn't that important for information management?

And yet, most of our information management approaches and systems up to now have failed by any reasonable measure (such as levels of adoption). We need to take quite different approaches if we are to succeed, and to do this, we need to start building a more innovative culture and marketplace around information management.

So the question is: how do we drive more innovation of information management? Suggestions welcome.

(Sorry there's still no commenting on this blog. I haven't had time to upgrade to a more recent version of Movable Type, and the current version just can't cope with the spam. Please do email me with your thoughts, and I'll try to summarise the comments in a future post.)

Posted by jamesr at 01:05 PM | Permalink
Categories: Content management