kbex

Entries categorized as ‘information architecture’

Something new…

March 11, 2009 · 2 Comments

I just wanted to write a post about the three hours it took me to teach a colleague how to publish videos on the intranet (and that only covers half of the work), and about that I’m looking forward to calculating a business case for the new solution we’ve been discussing for more then a year.

This morning, I got the amazing news: My project has been approved by the management board. We will build a new intranet. I started to work on the first proposals in November 2007  – so that were really really long discussions.

Now it’s signed; the main requirements we want to meet are:

  • build a portal that’s accessible for everybody from every country we’re operating in
  • introduce publication processes that talk with one voice to everybody (same content, same time, all audiences)
  • introduce permission management and closed usergroups where necessary
  • introduce group-personalisation to create different views on the content for different audiences
  • enhance the corporate directory towards an enterprise network
  • carefully introduce well planned blogs and microblogs with attractive authors
  • provide wikis as collaboration-, documentation and knowledgemanagement tools (knowledgemanagement projects are running in parallel)
  • use tags as additional navigation- and categorisation tools, introduce rss for easier and for flexible customization
  • support and train employees especially with increasing their media literacy

Detailed planning will continue now, I will keep posting and I’m looking forward to comments and discussions.

Categories: communication · design · information architecture · intranet · management · organization · project management · social media · user experience
Tagged: , , , , , , , ,

SEO Self Experiment, Week 3+4

March 9, 2009 · 1 Comment

Things are going down. Quite fast, actually. Web catalogs are slow with creating entries, bokmarking is not really a boost anymore once you have reached some basic values – and especially link popularity is quite far behind: 18 confirmed catalog entries, three blogs with over 50 entries each linking to the site – and google only recognizes 10 incoming links? These links contain only 2 catalogs, the rest are quite arbitrary posts from one of my blogs. Only eight from over fifty are counted; they are not the most recent ones, nore the most clicked, they are all from the same blog and they don’t differ from other posts at all – no idea why it’s them and not others (if it’s the pagerank of the linking page, that would mean that most catalogs are cheating about their rank. So let’s not assume that…).

Some conclusions for now:

  • It does not grow by itself. You can keep search results growing by adding bookmarks, entries, links, but you can not fully control the growth. The quality of the links is to challenge: it’s usually the same domains that get ranked well.
  • There does not seem to have been a page rank update since I’m running my stuff (some sites  say it will be on march 26), and the age (less then three months, which is mostly not registered by seo-analyzers) are further disadvantages.
  • Creating bookmarks and catalog-entries is one way to stay visible; it requires a lot of work (or using some tools and spending money) and it creates some background noise.
  • Efficieny is quite low – there are only a few directories that really make a change; it’s not that much effort to create an entry there.
  • There is a strong hype at the beginning, but the number of search results shrinks down quickly.
  • Referrer-analysis proves, that blogs, magazines, communities with high usage are the best traffic sources: you get qualified leads – and creating entries there is not such braindead work as creating web catalog entries
  • Other search engines are more generous than Google (especially with link popularity) but for no good: alltogether they bring about ten percent of the traffic google brings.
  • And finally: I’m also tracking the “real”, clickable search results from Google. At least they keep increasing (if you don’t care for some hype that obviously happened last week…

Next steps for me will be to create more comments and content oriented postings, and also to spread links in existing networks I built so far (which wil also be some endurance test for the network features).
I also submitted a simple sitemap (urls only) to see if that helps; especially because the results are generally quite old…

More updates next week…

34results

 
 34linkpop

 

34clickable

Categories: information architecture · user experience
Tagged: , , , , , ,

SEO Self Experiment – Week 2

February 25, 2009 · Leave a Comment

Search results are decreasing – quite fast actually. I keep adding web catalog entries, posting links on digg, delicious and stumble upon, but this does not have any important effect – at least not bigger then the negative effects from sorting out duplicates. That seems to be what the search engines are doing: some very efficient catalogs proved to have their efficiency only over a very short period (less than one week).
The good thing is: the number of real results (that are displayed and not filtered away) keeps increasing. And link popularity keeps rising. The strange thing is, that the link popularity reports do not show one single catalog entry, also many other links are missing – they display only results of an old blog of mine that I created more than two months ago.

The keyword results show a lot of movement: with the top two keywords, I’m still not among the top ten result pages, links to my domain now dropped from page 1 to page 4. The top three keywords deliver results between page 1 and 2 (detailed reports will follow next week).

The top search terms identified via Google analytics for my domain show, that people are obviously willing to click through a lot of pages. If i repeat the searches, I often don’t get any results at all from my domain among the top ten or twelve result pages. Maybe that also shows that there is strong movement among keyword results: Today’s search does not deliver the same results as yesterday’s search.

Search engine’s share in the referring sites is also decreasing (while visitors keep growing) – some people do obviously really click on the catalog entries. Decrease is quite slow; I will have to monitor it for another few days.

The age of the indexed pages does also vary a lot, not really depending from their publication date: some old, not yet beautifully indexed urls are still indexed, some result pages also display old page titles (changed three weeks ago).

Submitting xml-sitemaps will be one of the next steps, but only after a few weeks of further observation.

linkpopularity

 

searchresults

 

SEO Selfexperiment Week 1

SEO Selfexperiment

Categories: information architecture · user experience
Tagged: , , , , , ,

SEO Selfexperiment, Week 1

February 16, 2009 · Leave a Comment

A promised, some results.

It takes ages until contentmodifications of existing pages get displayed in search results. Some changes in pagetitles and metatags I made February 2 are still not visible (Feb. 16).

Results grow, but vary. Sometimes they grow exponentially to what I’m doing, sometimes slower, sometimes faster.
The same applies to the order of results: They change without any apparent changes on the pages themselves – the same results appear every day, but there ranking is different.

Search engines are very different in what they see: The number of results found reaches from 16 on live.com to 30.000 on yahoo.com (on the same day, with the same query).

Linksearch and Linkpopularity also grow with some delay. It took a few days, until Google found any links at all. The links that arelisted now in the search results are very old – I created them in the beginning of January. All other links are obviously not yet counted.

It’s too early to talk about success and the most important web catalogs yet – I’ll have to collect some more data. Here are just some charts on the basic development of results and links. The only thing I can say is Google may be ungenerous with links and results, but it’s of course the most prominent referrer.

results

resultstab

linkpop

linkpoptab

Enhanced by Zemanta

Categories: information architecture · user experience
Tagged: , , , , , ,

socs – Service Oriented Content Sourcing

December 17, 2008 · Leave a Comment

(CHINA OUT)  Wor...
Image by Getty Images via Daylife

I just spent six hours in a meeting with internal communication managers trying to find a define content for their internal media.

They switched from general rules to detailed content and back, reinvented everything, broke every agreement they achieved in the meeting and then agreed on it again – so it was quite an ordinary meeting.

But I had a few ideas on what are basic guidelines for content sourcing and defining contentguidelines, be it for print, online or audiovidual media.


Guideline #1: It does not really matter what you do. You will never come to an end if you try to define topics, typical stories, and content areas. It’s more a matter of how you do it: You can put everything in your media, as long as you do it in a way that attracts your audience and suits your company.


Guideline #2: It’s people who sell. You need faces, lives, quotes, emotions, personal experience, personal power. Build your content around people, use people as the main ingredient. Don’t say anything, let people say everything.


Guideline #3: Do tell stories. That corresponds directly to #2. Facts are ok, but only if they can be told, if the narrative dimension is ok too. And a narration is only worth reading,if it’s about people.

 

Guideline #4: Don’t worry too much about what you what to tell. Nobody cares about that. Do worry more about what your audience wants to read, and, foremost, why they should read your stuff at all. That depends on your audience and on the type of media.

 

Today’s discussion was about employee magazines. Employees expect benefit from their employers; they work for money, so they want get something out if they out something in. You can write about whatever you want; as long as people understand it as something they can do too, something they should not do, an offer or a rule, something that can push their career or facilitate their lives, they will read it.

It helps, if you think about content examples, but you will never have a complete listing, probably not even an inspiring one. Actually, the more precision you try to bring into these lists, the more boring they get.

If you focus on the kind of service you want to deliver, you can probably describe it in three lines. It will help you find new contents, it will help your audience understand your media, and it will create additional value that is obvious and understandable for everybody.

That’s why I call it SOCS – the Service Oriented Content Sourcing approach. No matter what you what to publish – focus on how you want to publish it, how you want to tell it and want service you want to deliver to your users.

That also reveals the sad side of it: You have to know your business. You can talk, negotiate, define for ages – if you don’t have the experience and the feeling for what makes a great story, then you need professional help.

You can learn to write, you can learn to take pictures and you can also learn how to find, invent, describe or tell great stories – but you need to be aware that this is a discipline on it’s own.

Every successfull media have their guidelines, sometimes they are explicitly written, sometimes they are part of general guidelines, sometimes they are just there.

Some samples for SOCS-Guidelines:

Every story in xxxxx Magazine is there to activate our employees. Its tells them what they can do and how they can start it.

We always present the full view. Our readers are able to participate in any discussion with colleagues or customers, and they will always be well informed, they will not be surprised by anything.

We don’t have managers talking. It’s always employees who tell the story.

And, as an example from a more general perpective:

We tell dramatic stories from all over the world – but we always look for a connection to our country.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Categories: content management · user experience
Tagged: , , ,

ECM Summit Day 2: Communication Controlling and Knowledge Management

November 12, 2008 · Leave a Comment

Today I could listen to another four presentations.

In the morning, the topic was communication controlling: How do you know that your communication activities really achieve their goals, that you reach your audience – and how can you transform that into ideas for and ROI argumentation?

First speaker was Mark-Steffen Buchel from aexea who introduced a case study from Vattenfall. They built a balanced scorecard-like kpi-measuring tool, that showed interdependencies between different criteria and their influence on some main criteria. Eg. download speed of the websites is split into real download time, error rates, download time perception (by users), explicit user satisfaction and some more criteria.

In order to keep the data current, Vattenfall does quarterly user surveys.

Quite a lot of work, but it seems to be promising – if you are asking the big questions, then you have to invest some work to get the answers.

Rolf Schulte Strathaus from eparo held the second presentation. He spoke about a portal relaunch project where they made heavy use of wireframes, wireframe clickdummies and wireframe mockups.

I did not quite get the point why this was supposed to cover communication controlling, but I’m a huge fan of wireframes anyway.

In the afternoon, I attended a panel on knowledge management. Erik Schulz from FH Berlin showed a casestudy from Berliner Gaswerke, where they focused on networks only – and not on technical topics. A lot of places where created where people can talk and interact (while having coffee or eating apples), a culture of sharing was set up in order to make people feel more comfortable, and some tools for storing knowledge where created.

I guess it works great as long as everybody is in the same building; might be difficult with bigger companies.

The second speech was held by Joachim Lindner from ABB. He introduced an international wiki in his company. Standard solution, but a cool approach: To get attention, he invited all 120.000 worldwide ABB-employees to a Web2.0-kick off-conference. 120 came and built the foundation for the first company wiki.

ABB invested three months of work in building the structure (sometimes for three and more levels of pages) and some initial content, another month in a wiki roadshow and now one day per week in monitoring and cleaning the wiki. It’s only a few months old, but it seems to start growing (also through the help of so called wiki-wichtel, who are reponsible persons in the business departments) and might be a very good example for real basic setup projects.

Categories: applied collaboration · content management · intranet
Tagged:

ECM Summit – some slides in multilingual intranets

November 12, 2008 · Leave a Comment

Categories: intranet · multilingual

ECM Summit – Day 1: Social Media in the Enterprise, Multilanguage Management

November 12, 2008 · Leave a Comment

I could listen to four case studies on two topics today.

Xonio.com presented it’s social media activities. Xonio is a B2C-portal focusing on mobilephones other mobile hardware stuff, mostly publishing testing reports.

Actually, they summarize almost everything in the social media topic: comments, boards, rss, even emailsupport for users. (more…)

Categories: communication · intranet · multilingual
Tagged:

Multilingual Sites – designing custom solutions

November 6, 2008 · Leave a Comment

We look at multilingual sites as a matter of workflow and technical problems. That’s not everything, we also have a lot of social and political issues.

How are they connected?

That also depends on what kind of multilingual sites we are talking: (more…)

Categories: information architecture · multilingual

Multilingual Sites – the untranslatable

October 29, 2008 · Leave a Comment

There are several reasons why some contents can not be translated:

  • specific terms
  • specific languages (english, russian, latin)
  • multimedia – pictures, video, audio
  • you would not understand it anyway: “is your birthday calendar really the high priority content for the intranet-homepage?”

Hierarchical terms that denominate positions that do not exist in other countries, popular terms that are hard to understand for non native speakers and even harder to translate – both are great in creating identity, they are entertaining and they are good means of communication.
But they are also tools to exclude others: That’s our thing, we say that, you don’t have to bother. You can no and should not get rid of this on a local level, but you can not use it if acting internationally; you have to neutralize yourself (one common way: just talk broken english – as I am doing it here – nothing will be perfect;; everybody will understand… )

Sometimes, it’s not the language, but the attitude that can’t be translated.
The further east I go the more I am impressed by how important birthdays and namedays are in many cee-cultures. – That must be highly fertile area for any social media services, but it’s very hard to integrate warmest wishes into business-style intranets as we know them. As prime content on the portal homepage, notabene.

A third quite special case are pictures, video- and audiofiles. Metadata can either be translated or use common language so that it’s easier to argue about, captions and other supporting texts are also easy to translate.
Pictures should be general, but actually they are not. Pictures tell a lot about tradition, power and personal views, and that is closely related to local views and traditions. A western CEO may want to visualize cooperation, openness and friendliness, an  eastern CEO may rather want to represent strength, wealth and power. Western users will understand the strength-image as something oldfashioned, maybe even threatening. Eastern users may interpret open friendliness as weakness.
A universal picture language will end up being just boring. So this has to be handled somewhere else, it’s a mainly cultural and political matter where official media can only support.

Videos strongly transport values and identity. Use them only, if your plan is really clear – or if your actors are great. Information-driven videos that contain a lot of explanations can synchronised; vox pops or interviews should never be completely synchronised. That will just destroy their actual value. 
To summarize: I feel more and more that multilingual sites are not a matter of translation, workflows, contentmanagement or menus, but they interfere a lot with cultural and political values in the enterprise, they have a high impact on information architecture – and they are one of the big cost drivers for portals.

Categories: content management · design · management · multilingual