Posted on June 8, 2006 by sethearley
Indexing and Taxonomy creation are closely related processes. In the first case we start with a body of content and then pull from it the key ideas, concepts, pieces of knowledge that we think users would like to access and then create pointers to the content. In the second, we look at a body of information and determine the categories that can be used to describe the content. (Usually without regard to the pointers to instances of terms).
Filed under: Indexing | 2 Comments »
Posted on May 21, 2006 by sethearley
This is another response to a post about the “shared drive problem.” Shiv Singh of Avenue A- Razorfish commented that “Every document in an organization is not necessarily important enough to tag. Some organizations address this problem by first determining what knowledge/information/data is worth capturing for retrieval and then putting KM mechanisms in place to capture, codify and distribute it.”
My thought is that there is a continuum of value of documents. On one end of the spectrum, news feeds, unmoderated discussion, etc. Chaotic but useful in terms of creativity and problem solving – ongoing discussions like this one. At the other end of the spectrum might be best practices, templates, methodologies – structured, scrubbed, edited and tagged. Higher value knowledge is more costly to vet, tag, file and maintain. A vast majority of documents fall somewhere in between. Many (perhaps most) are intermediary products. Since the value is context dependant (as others have mentioned) and may have value as a need arises, it’s very difficult to organize them without some judgment about current and future value. I’ve seen environments where documents were nominated to be example deliverables – someone thought the document would be useful to others. There was a process in place to measure submissions and people were somewhat incentivized to do so.
Filed under: Indexing | Leave a comment »