• Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

« Blogs, Articles, Tweets, Oh My! (on AIIM and Enterprise 2.0) | Main | Of Findability, Folksonomies, and Facets »


I have to agree with Dan on this one. As fate would have it, and for full disclosure, I used to work in the same company as Dan for 8 years (we also have kept in touch since then). I have full trust in Dan and Carl's ability as experts on the topic of "search" (in all its glory).

Search is an often misunderstood concept. Findability (yes, a reasonable reference...Wiki it) refers to location of information pertinent to completion of a task. The problem is that task completion depends on context and that is what can be frustrating unless your underlying search/indexing engine, etc... are tuned for a more sophisticated search...many are not and most users don't have the patience to better understand how to leverage it.

Back in the days when Knowledge Management was hot (circa 1997), largely due to all the tacit knowledge being lost by companies as experienced employees left, there was a lot of inference around a data centric model..."write the letter and then write why you wrote it". This clearly didn't work.

Getting to the "answer" for many organizations is anchored in plowing through the companies ERP and CRM data via complex and expensive reporting tools which is inherently easier to mine due to its structured nature but still leaves much of the innovation-centric tacit information stuck in the unstructured info (text, emails, etc...)...both sets of information are critical.

In the end, I personally believe that organizations and individuals fail to implement these solutions due to a complex set of limitations (both real and self imposed) and the result of their resulting "triage" leaves them unwilling to establish a set of goals for incremental improvements to the "problem".

The comments to this entry are closed.


Last 3 Comments

Feel the Rush

  • Featured in Alltop
  • ss_blog_claim=979124f7ac7da11838fc99d4426b903d