BizTechTalk

Lost in a Sea of Search? Find It!

Did you know?

69% of people responding to our Findability survey believe that <50% of their business content is available online.

49% of respondents “Agreed” or “Strongly Agreed” that “Finding the Information I Need to Do My Job is Difficult and Time Consuming.”

Whew. I've spent almost a decade helping people understand how to make the most out of search, taxonomies, relevancy ranking algorithms, user interfaces, information architectures and more.

Looks like there is still plenty of work left to be done - as we are nowhere near universal satisfaction with Findability in the Enterprise.

As I've been mentioning for a few months now, the long awaited (well, I've been longing to deliver it, that counts, right?) Market IQ on Findability is now freely available for download. Over 65 pages and 70 charts/figures, I believe you (and your manager, executives, IT staff, business colleagues, etc.) will find interesting material in this research.

The research is provided completely and entirely free, although we do of course ask for (minimal) registration information. Grab yourself a copy while it is hot off the virtual presses!

I don't mean to paint an overly negative picture, but enterprises (and whoever does or does not "own" search/find or for that matter, content) are not doing a fantastic job at minimizing the amount of time wasted in organizations (time isn't money it would seem) trying to find the information people need to do their job, or the amount of time wasted in re-creating information that already exists, but can't be found.

Some organizations are doing a much better job at providing useful, intelligent Findability experiences for their employees, partners and customers - but it is far more rare than it is common.

What are YOU finding in your own experiences with Findability in the enterprise? Total chaos? Search bliss? Irrelevant junk? Instant success?

Would love to hear what your experiences are, and any feedback you have on this research. For those 528 people who contributed their time in responding to the survey, thank you again for your time and efforts. Much appreciated!

Of Findability, Folksonomies, and Facets

Ramping up to our webinar in support of the forthcoming findings in the Market IQ on Findability, I wanted to point out a few useful resources to help in selling (or at least understanding) the issues that impact Findability, and ways to "solve" Findability.

First resource:
A presentation I'd posted a few months ago, and which I'd first created several years ago and used to make people's heads explode after I'd just spent 1-2 full days extolling the virtues of taxonomies and formal organization schemes.

Folksonomies and Facets

| View | Upload your own

Second resource:
At the Enterprise 2.0 Conference 2 weeks ago, I ran into Thomas Vander Wal, who coined the term "folksonomy." What better way to FURTHER explain the concept, than point to one of his recent presentations that relate to this? The presentation I chose discusses both the collaborative (it's made of people!) side of folksonomy (social bookmarking, primarily - ala delicious, connectbeam, etc.) as well as the tags and tagging that underpins the process.

After Noah: Making Sense of the Flood (of Information)

| View | Upload your own

Third resource:

If any (all?) of this is of interest, stay tuned for our Market IQ on Findability, and the free public webinar coming up on Thursday June 26th at 2pm EDT, we've released some early findings (see press release), and have quite a bit more coming.

In the meantime - anyone using a folksonomy approach in your organization? Successfully? Failing? Would love to hear more about your experiences, and help to raise the best and worst practices around these areas.

Re: Enterprise Search Still Sucks...

Always interesting to see what happens when you release some new findings out into the wild. What will people key on? Who will pick it up? Do they get it, or regurgitate misunderstandings and misconceptions?

In support of our upcoming Market IQ on Findability, and the free public webinar coming up next Thursday June 26th at 2pm EDT, we've released some early findings (see press release).

One shocking finding  (to me at least - you?) is that 69% of respondents (to our survey of over 500 companies, executed in May 2008) report that less than half of enterprise information is searchable online. Ouch!

For those who believe that search is going to solve their "can't find it" problem, that's very bad news.

And in that vein, a fellow analyst (for Enterprise Strategy Group), Steve Duplessie (Founder and Senior Analyst), provided the following commentary on our press release yesterday (this is going to be surreal - me quoting Steve quoting us):

[Dan's Note: Steve's blog post]

Enterprise Search Still Sucks…..

This is absolutely brilliant.  This is what makes my (pseudo) job worth it.

I just opened an email from Beth Mayhew, Director of Marketing for AIMM.org that says this:

[Dan's Note: Quote below of the entirety of our press release, minus the links. I thought blogging was about providing links to what you're commenting on, so users can form their own judgement. Or is this mere ivory tower mudslinging?]

"Enterprise Search Frustrates and Disappoints Users

69% of respondents report that less than half of enterprise information is searchable online

Silver Spring, MD – June 17, 2008 – In a new study on Findability to be released by AIIM, 49% of survey respondents "agreed" or "strongly agreed" that it is a difficult and time consuming process to find the information they need to do their job. The new survey of over 500 businesses conducted in May 2008, suspects that a prime culprit for the failings of Findability in the enterprise is the admission that 69% of respondents believe that only 50% or less of their organization's information is searchable online. Given the ready access that users are supposed to have in this "Age of Google" – how is this possible?

"Findability has been a common source of frustration in the enterprise for decades," states AIIM Vice President Carl Frappaolo. "As information has become more and more digital, from it's creation through to management, the pain of finding enterprise information has moved from the piles of paper on the desktop and in storage cabinets, to the digital landfill of file servers, e-mail inboxes, digital desktops, and content management systems. Despite the advances made in search on the internet, enterprise search leaves most users frustrated."

Finding content digitally is only possible if pointers to content or the content itself is in native digital format, made available for indexing by search, and/or accessible by information organization and access techniques (such as navigational structures, taxonomies, bookmarks, etc.). The lack of such functionality in the enterprise is at the heart of user frustration.

But fault does not lie with technology solution providers. Most organizations have failed to take a strategic approach to enterprise search. 49% of respondents have "No Formal Goal" for enterprise Findability within their organizations, and a large subset of the overall research population state that when it comes to the "Criticality of Findability to their Organization's Business Goals and Success", 38% have no idea ("Don't Know") what the importance of Findability is in comparison to a mere 10% who claim Findability is "Imperative" to their organization.

The lack of strategic understanding, implemented plans and technological pros and cons to address Findability in the enterprise continues to cause pain in most organizations, although slow progress is being made."

[Dan's Note: Steve's comments follow]

Several Points:

1. Duh. You can't find diddly in an enterprise or out. When does 2 zillion responses to search end up being helpful? It's ridiculous how much internal corporate knowledge is totally wasted because your own people can't find what they need.
2. "Findability"?
3. Not one to nitpick but "from it's creation" should be "its creation". 
4. Perhaps best of all – try to find out in this press release what AIIM stands for! The irony is superb. Better yet, go to AIIM.org – it still isn't obvious. When you search AIIM in their search bar, it takes you off site to Google, who promptly displays 326,000 results, none of which actually define AIIM as far as I can find.

So the organization assembled to deal with the issues associated with finding information does a survey that tells us that users are not happy when they can't find information, but uses Google to not find information that its members (or me) might like to find. I almost don't want to ask, but where do they keep these survey results? Have you seen 'em? Nope, have you?

You can't just make this stuff up. It would have been much better if they slipped in something like "48% of all data is entirely fabricated, but 98% of the time we can't prove it because no one knows where any of the information is".

So if this little brilliantly perfect example doesn't get you to realize that without an entirely different data-centric approach to categorizing and classifying data – ideally at creation – you are completely and utterly hosed, nothing will. E-discovery my butt.

And my commentary to Steve (he moderates comments [so much for transparency], so I'm posting here as well as tracking back to his post):

Steve - Interesting take on our research, thanks for the humorous commentary. Or was it serious? Hard to tell.

So apparently the very first link in the upper left navigation of AIIM.org, "About AIIM" wasn't good enough for you? Seems like a fairly obvious location to find such information, and if there are any best practices for website navigation, that would be at the top of the list.

Findability is NOT just about search. I couldn't have made the point clearer than that - so thank you for the beautiful illustration. Expecting search to solve all ills is a major failing for enterprise information management. Sometimes it's exactly the tool you need, and other times, not so much.

And yes, of course you're going to find thousands to hundreds of thousands of pages if you search for AIIM directly on our site. It does appear on every page after all. Perhaps you should stick to commentary on data, hardware and storage (which I will happily stay away from, except for those times when it intersects with my commentary on information, content and knowledge - that stuff that "data-centric" people would like to pretend doesn't exist or matter), since you clearly don't understand the way that unstructured (or semi-structured) information is indexed for search engine consumption and result display.

Incidentally, AIIM is no longer an acronym (or is it "AIMM" as you misspelled it in the 2nd line of "Director of Marketing for AIMM.org"?). Just as IBM is no longer "International Business Machines" (or worse I.B.M. - where does AP get it's guidelines for these things?), CA is no longer "Computer Associates" and the Web 2.0 API "standard" called REST is no longer "REpresentational State Transfer."

But again, if only you had looked at the "About AIIM" (at the top of every page on the site), you could've easily discovered that AIIM has (in the past) been an acronym for the Association for Information and Image Management. We've been around (with various name changes) for 65 years, and have around 50,000 associates and members in our non-profit association flock.

Lastly, you are nearly correct when you say "it takes you off site to Google," but not quite - but that's a failing on our part. That is the Google Search Appliance (note the subtle bolded "appliance" tag in the upper navigation), and the search results haven't been re-skinned for the site redesign that launched last week.

It could all be handled more gracefully and seamlessly integrated to be sure (although I'm an analyst - and not responsible for our own search implementation), but again, you're using the wrong tool for the job. Particularly if you searched only on AIIM (or AIMM), rather than a more targeted search.

Incidentally, if you had searched on "About AIIM," the page already referenced is hit number 5. Perhaps you are one of the search users who only looks at the first 3 results?

Thanks for making MY day - even though I've been helping to teach findability-related topics for 8 years now, I frequently wonder "Doesn't everybody already know this stuff?" Then along comes commentary like this, and it's clear that we're a long way from universally solving these problems.

Ah well, back to work! Much to be done.

Cheers,
Dan

So, dear blog readers - am I simply suffering from crankiness on this hump day (Wednesday), or does this just exactly illustrate why search is not the (only) answer?

There are many paths to the stuff you want to FIND - search, taxonomy or other navigation techniques, dynamic clustering, social recommendations, bookmarks, "pinned" results, visualization techniques to allow discovery of an information space, etc..

Would love your feedback on this, and if these types of problems are causing YOUR organization issues, please sign up (for free) to the Market IQ on Findability, and the free public webinar coming up next Thursday June 26th at 2pm EDT.

'Till next time... Dan

 

This is absolutely brilliant.  This is what makes my (pseudo) job worth it.

I just opened an email from Beth Mayhew, Director of Marketing for AIMM.org that says this:

[Dan's Note: Quote below of the entirety of our press release, minus the links. I thought blogging was about providing links to what you're commenting on, so users can form their own judgement. Or is this mere ivory tower mudslinging?]

"Enterprise Search Frustrates and Disappoints Users

69% of respondents report that less than half of enterprise information is searchable online

Silver Spring, MD – June 17, 2008 – In a new study on Findability to be released by AIIM, 49% of survey respondents "agreed" or "strongly agreed" that it is a difficult and time consuming process to find the information they need to do their job. The new survey of over 500 businesses conducted in May 2008, suspects that a prime culprit for the failings of Findability in the enterprise is the admission that 69% of respondents believe that only 50% or less of their organization's information is searchable online. Given the ready access that users are supposed to have in this "Age of Google" – how is this possible?

"Findability has been a common source of frustration in the enterprise for decades," states AIIM Vice President Carl Frappaolo. "As information has become more and more digital, from it's creation through to management, the pain of finding enterprise information has moved from the piles of paper on the desktop and in storage cabinets, to the digital landfill of file servers, e-mail inboxes, digital desktops, and content management systems. Despite the advances made in search on the internet, enterprise search leaves most users frustrated."

Finding content digitally is only possible if pointers to content or the content itself is in native digital format, made available for indexing by search, and/or accessible by information organization and access techniques (such as navigational structures, taxonomies, bookmarks, etc.). The lack of such functionality in the enterprise is at the heart of user frustration.

But fault does not lie with technology solution providers. Most organizations have failed to take a strategic approach to enterprise search. 49% of respondents have "No Formal Goal" for enterprise Findability within their organizations, and a large subset of the overall research population state that when it comes to the "Criticality of Findability to their Organization's Business Goals and Success", 38% have no idea ("Don't Know") what the importance of Findability is in comparison to a mere 10% who claim Findability is "Imperative" to their organization.

The lack of strategic understanding, implemented plans and technological pros and cons to address Findability in the enterprise continues to cause pain in most organizations, although slow progress is being made."

[Dan's Note: Steve's comments follow]

Several Points:

1. Duh. You can't find diddly in an enterprise or out. When does 2 zillion responses to search end up being helpful? It's ridiculous how much internal corporate knowledge is totally wasted because your own people can't find what they need.
2. "Findability"?
3. Not one to nitpick but "from it's creation" should be "its creation". 
4. Perhaps best of all – try to find out in this press release what AIIM stands for! The irony is superb. Better yet, go to AIIM.org – it still isn't obvious. When you search AIIM in their search bar, it takes you off site to Google, who promptly displays 326,000 results, none of which actually define AIIM as far as I can find.

So the organization assembled to deal with the issues associated with finding information does a survey that tells us that users are not happy when they can't find information, but uses Google to not find information that its members (or me) might like to find. I almost don't want to ask, but where do they keep these survey results? Have you seen 'em? Nope, have you?

You can't just make this stuff up. It would have been much better if they slipped in something like "48% of all data is entirely fabricated, but 98% of the time we can't prove it because no one knows where any of the information is".

So if this little brilliantly perfect example doesn't get you to realize that without an entirely different data-centric approach to categorizing and classifying data – ideally at creation – you are completely and utterly hosed, nothing will. E-discovery my butt.

And my commentary to Steve (he moderates comments [so much for transparency], so I'm posting here as well as tracking back to his post):

Steve - Interesting take on our research, thanks for the humorous commentary. Or was it serious? Hard to tell.

So apparently the very first link in the upper left navigation of AIIM.org, "About AIIM" wasn't good enough for you? Seems like a fairly obvious location to find such information, and if there are any best practices for website navigation, that would be at the top of the list.

Findability is NOT just about search. I couldn't have made the point clearer than that - so thank you for the beautiful illustration. Expecting search to solve all ills is a major failing for enterprise information management. Sometimes it's exactly the tool you need, and other times, not so much.

And yes, of course you're going to find thousands to hundreds of thousands of pages if you search for AIIM directly on our site. It does appear on every page after all. Perhaps you should stick to commentary on data, hardware and storage (which I will happily stay away from, except for those times when it intersects with my commentary on information, content and knowledge - that stuff that "data-centric" people would like to pretend doesn't exist or matter), since you clearly don't understand the way that unstructured (or semi-structured) information is indexed for search engine consumption and result display.

Incidentally, AIIM is no longer an acronym (or is it "AIMM" as you misspelled it in the 2nd line of "Director of Marketing for AIMM.org"?). Just as IBM is no longer "International Business Machines" (or worse I.B.M. - where does AP get it's guidelines for these things?), CA is no longer "Computer Associates" and the Web 2.0 API "standard" called REST is no longer "REpresentational State Transfer."

But again, if only you had looked at the "About AIIM" (at the top of every page on the site), you could've easily discovered that AIIM has (in the past) been an acronym for the Association for Information and Image Management. We've been around (with various name changes) for 65 years, and have around 50,000 associates and members in our non-profit association flock.

Lastly, you are nearly correct when you say "it takes you off site to Google," but not quite - but that's a failing on our part. That is the Google Search Appliance (note the subtle bolded "appliance" tag in the upper navigation), and the search results haven't been re-skinned for the site redesign that launched last week.

It could all be handled more gracefully and seamlessly integrated to be sure (although I'm an analyst - and not responsible for our own search implementation), but again, you're using the wrong tool for the job. Particularly if you searched only on AIIM (or AIMM), rather than a more targeted search.

Incidentally, if you had searched on "About AIIM," the page already referenced is hit number 5. Perhaps you are one of the search users who only looks at the first 3 results?

Thanks for making MY day - even though I've been helping to teach findability-related topics for 8 years now, I frequently wonder "Doesn't everybody already know this stuff?" Then along comes commentary like this, and it's clear that we're a long way from universally solving these problems.

Ah well, back to work! Much to be done.

Cheers,
Dan

So, dear blog readers - am I simply suffering from crankiness on this hump day (Wednesday), or does this just exactly illustrate why search is not the (only) answer?

There are many paths to the stuff you want to FIND - search, taxonomy or other navigation techniques, dynamic clustering, social recommendations, bookmarks, "pinned" results, visualization techniques to allow discovery of an information space, etc..

Would love your feedback on this, and if these types of problems are causing YOUR organization issues, please sign up (for free) to the Market IQ on Findability, and the free public webinar coming up next Thursday June 26th at 2pm EDT.

'Till next time... Dan

 

The Long Tail of Presentations (Be Findable!)

I've posted my presentations from time to time here on my blog, and typically hosted (in the end) at slideshare.net.

Although I've been a reader/viewer of presentations on slideshare.net for some time, I only began posting presentation to the site 7 months ago.

Why is that?

There were many reasons why I believed this was worth a bit of experimentation:

1. For content that I've already shared publicly already, this is a good central location for me to refer people to. Any time I present now, I simply point people to slideshare.net/dan.keldsen and away they go. Solves the problem of conferences or other events that do not have a presentation sharing location, and even if they do, provides the ability for people to see what else I'm yammering about (context and discovery is awfully handy).
2. Experimentation with "2.0" tech, and the ability to easily share/embed content, in my blog, YOUR blog, or anywhere else - makes it that much easier to get even more life out of my presentations. Re-usability and broad distribution is a great benefit of where we are in the state of the web these days. Simple standards and mechanisms win out over complexity every time. Please, feel free to refer to my presentation as you like - simply attribute appropriately, and link back to the slideshare repository (or wherever I've posted it).
3. If I'm sharing information already, for example a presentation I gave 6 months ago in Denmark entitled "Who's the Boss, MOSS?"- I'd be willing to bet that the majority of people on the planet didn't make it to that presentation. So why not open the information to a much larger audience? There were perhaps 50-75 people in the room - yet on slideshare, 1861 views have totaled up since I'd posted it the day of the presentation. That's a nice magnification of the audience - and in this case, that "Long Tail" is one heck of bigger audience than I'd had at my disposal in the live audience.
4. Like many of the other things I do, blogging and podcasting for example, you don't have to take my word for it that I know what I'm talking about - you can go and experience it for yourself. So rather than reading what I have to say about myself on a resume (or LinkedIn) about my experience and expertise (and I try to be as truthful and upfront as possible, but nobody is perfect - and as Seth Godin says "All Marketers are Liars" - see video of Seth on this topic)

There are many more reasons, and I'd love to hear what others are finding as either useful or useLESS about such a resource. There is almost no downside to posting your presentations - as long as they are meant to be public at all, the broader reach you can gain, the more usefulness that content will have to you and your potential customers, next potential employer, existing customers, etc..

And to simply whack you over the head with my point, and tie this to our current research - the Market IQ on Findability (due out in June, pre-register for the public webinar) - you can't FIND what isn't available in some findable form.

You may have some brilliant presentations sitting on your desktop/laptop - but unless it's out there, somewhere, in a format that allows it to be searched or otherwise navigated to, nobody will ever know about it. As I said in a somewhat controversial post recently, ideas are nothing - it's executing on them that's the trick. Take it another step, and even execution on the idea isn't enough. If you have a 100 MPG car that's in production, but nobody knows it exists, then you may as well not have bothered, as the end effect is ZERO. That's marketing, folks, and it applies both for the outside world (to consumers or other businesses) as well as internally to your organization (making people aware of what you can do as an employee).

Search isn't magic - and this business of the "Long Tail" which has gotten considerable hype since Chris Anderson's article in Wired and expanded missives in the book released in 2006 is not just applicable to consumer-facing services, and specifically about SELLING.

Much of the content that should be powering your organization is stuck in silos (such as your inbox) which might be of incredible value within your organization. And merely lamenting that information is in your organization, and going about in recreating a sales proposal, a PowerPoint presentation, or pursuing a line of research isn't just a bad idea, it is a huge waste of the existing resources of your organization.

Re-invention/re-creation is a tax on your organization that isn't adequately accounted for by typical financial accounting methods. Findability plays a key role in breaking that cycle - take a listen to a podcast interview I had done with Stan Garfield a year ago on "Reinvention Prevention" - which discusses this issue of findability for knowledge and innovation purposes.

To wrap it up - we've closed the survey for the Market IQ on Findability, stay tuned for the final report, and please feel free to pre-register yourself for the free public webinar where we'll be discussing the findings.

In the meantime - what is YOUR personal experience in the "Long Tail" - whether as a consumer (the "traditional" sense of the Long Tail), or within your enterprise? Are your colleagues understanding this? Is this a reason that gets people to contribute their content into a content management system, wiki, blog, etc.? Has it had any affect at all? Would love to hear how people are thinking and acting around this type of thinking.

Comment away!

Findability Survey is Now Live - Weigh In!

Our Q2 2008 research project is the Market IQ on Findability - and the survey to feed our data-driven approach to the quarterly research is now live. Do you have search in your enterprise? At all? Good search? Horrible? User-created tagging? Armies of Taxonomists? An ability to look across applications, repositories, sites in your quest for content, information, or knowledge?

Regardless of the state of organization's Findability Status - your input is extremely important to us. Please, weigh on in, and join the 100 or so people that have already completed the survey in the few hours we've had this open.

The more data the better, and this time around, we are looking not just for business drivers, functionality needed/wanted/hated, but also looking at satisfaction and implementation feedback on the list of companies/solutions provided in a previous post (vote in the survey, not in the blog entry).

Findability and all that it entails, search, taxonomy, user interfaces, information architecture and much, much more, is something that I've been very deeply involved in for the last 8 years, as an instructor, consultant, and implementer, as well as a researcher.

Search isn't solved just yet folks - but there has been quite a revolution in the world of Findability in the last 5 years, and my sense is that adoption at both the trailing and leading edges are still nowhere near where they could be. Would love to be proven wrong, or validated.

For any of the people who had taken our public or private versions of the Proving Ground on Information Architecture and Taxonomy (while I was at Delphi Group), feel free to join in the survey experience. For that matter, would love to hear how your projects have progressed, so feel free to connect with me in the nearly year old role within Market Intelligence at AIIM.org.

The resulting research will be freely available, due in late June, and will have an associated free public webinar as well.

In the short-term, you also have a chance to win 1 of 25 gift certificates for Amazon.com if you provide your e-mail address (so we can contact you if you win), and complete the survey in it's entirety.

I'm monitoring the survey via built-in chat in the footer of each survey page, as well as via Twitter. Any issues, please let me know.

Final List of Findability-related Solutions/Providers

Our Market IQ on Findability survey will be available shortly (feel free to sign up in advance for the webinar in June that will discuss the findings), in the meantime, anyone currently using any of the following solutions, you may want to keep an eye out for the survey launch, and and give us your opinions around Findability.

Not just on the effectiveness of the solution, but on your experiences and concerns with Findability (Search, Taxonomy, Interfaces, Visualization, etc.), to help us uncover the current state of the market, where problems still exist, what benefits you've seen, and so on.

Stay tuned... in the meantime, the list:
alias i (LingPipe)
Ankiro
Antidot
Attivio
Autonomy
Baynote
Bitext
Brainware
Clarabridge
Cogenz
Connectbeam
Connotate Technologies
Consona (KNOVA)
Convera Retrievalware
Conversive
CopperEye
Coveo
Dieselpoint
Dow Jones (Factiva)
Dow Jones (Synaptica)
dtSearch
EMC (askOnce)
Endeca
Exalead
Expert System
FAST
FirstRain
FunnelBack
Google Search Applliance
IBM (Dogear)
IBM (OmniFind)
Infospace
Infovell
Inmagic
InQuira
IntelliSearch
Inxight (Business Objects)
ISYS
Kaidara
Kazeon
Leximancer
Megaputer
Mercado
Microsoft
NextIT
Omniture (Visual Sciences)
OnTopia
Open Text
Oracle (Secure Enterprise Search)
PolySpot
Progress Software (EasyAsk)
Radian6
Raritan Technologies
Recommind
Reuters (Calais)
SAP (NetWeaver Enterprise Search)
SAS (Enterprise Miner)
SchemaLogic
Scuttle
Siderean
SignaText
Sinequa
SLI Systems
SPSS (Clementine)
SPSS (Lexiquest)
StoredIQ
Stratify (Iron Mountain)
Synomia
Temis
Teragram (SAS)
Thunderstone
Verity K2 (Autonomy)
Vivisimo
WCC
Wordmap
X1
Xerox
ZyLAB
Open Source: Lucene
Open Source: Lucene + Solr
Other (please specify)

Findability - What Solutions Are Missing?

We will be launching the survey in support of our Q2 Market IQ on Findability as of Monday, April 28th, and want to make sure that we are providing adequately rounded questions as part of the survey.

Thank you to those who have already weighed in on the previous post for this research - much appreciated!

Would like to know in this post if we've missed any "enterprise findability" solutions (search, taxonomy, text analytics, auto-classification, information architecture, visualization, etc.).

If we are (and any solution providers who find themselves missing, please feel free to add a comment), please comment below.

The list thus far:
Antidot
Attivio
Autonomy
Baynote
Brainware
Connotate Technologies
Consona (KNOVA)
Convera Retrievalware
CopperEye
Coveo
Dieselpoint
dtSearch
EMC (askOnce)
Endeca
Exalead
Expert System
Dow Jones (Factiva)
Dow Jones (Synaptica)
FAST
FunnelBack
Google Search Applliance
IBM
Infospace
Infovell
Inmagic
InQuira
IntelliSearch
Inxight (Business Objects)
ISYS
Kaidara
Kazeon
Mercado
Microsoft
NextIT
Omniture (Visual Sciences)
OnTopia
Open Source: Lucene
Open Source: Lucene + Solr
Open Source: Nutch
Open Text
Oracle (Secure Enterprise Search)
PolySpot
Progress Software (EasyAsk)
Raritan Technologies
Recommind
SAP (NetWeaver Enterprise Search)
SchemaLogic
Siderean
Sinequa
SLI Systems
Temis
Teragram (SAS)
Thunderstone
Verity K2 (Autonomy)
Vivisimo
WCC
Wordmap
X1
ZyLAB

--

Looking forward to your commentary - let's enrich this list (or stun me by saying we haven't missed anyone).

Presentation: Folksonomies and Facets

A blast from the past, slightly dusted off... relates to the previous entry on tagging and social bookmarking, and an enterprise view.

The embedded version can be a bit hard to read, so feel free to jump over to slideshare and view full screen, or download the presentation. It's not the slickest presentation, but I've found it useful in introducing people to these concepts, in the 3 years I've used it, time and again.

| View | Upload your own

Thoughts? Who's doing (from a user, not supplier, standpoint) enterprise oriented tagging/bookmarking these days?

The Business of Web 2.0: Getting a Return on Technology

  The Business of Web 2.0: Getting a Return on Technology, from SAS Institute - White Papers, Webcasts and Case Studies - ZDNet 
  Originally uploaded by dankeldsen

I'm confused, is this a whitepaper or a webcast? And if it's a webcast, why does it require a plugin on a Mac, when Flash-based video runs rampant on ZDNet? Ah, taxonomy and usability, my old friends... run amok!