http://www1.umn.edu/brand/requirements-and-guidelines/web-templates/requirements.php
]]>Jody, can you find out if this is something that can be modified or if it will be fixed in a future upgrade?
]]>At our last meeting, we worked on more clearly defining the audiences for and types of articles that will be in the knowledge management tool and are now gathering examples of each type of article. See an excerpt from our meeting meetings:
]]>Audiences
- Public
- Helpline (students)
- Tier 1 (fulltimers) support; includes college/some departmental IT support staff (like CSOM)
- Tier 2 support (TAC)
- Engineers (not sure how much they will use knowledge base; they already know all that stuff)
Each question could have a problem-solution about how to find the answer; like how to find the Mac address.
Article Types
Decision tree
* a series of questions based on an initial symptom used to narrow down what the user's problem is and directing them to the next level of help and/or self-help sources
How to
* steps to complete a task the way it is supposed to be done (part of training and support sites, such as http://www.oit.umn.edu/wireless/setup-guides/windows-7-secure/index.htm; live in multiple places)
Problem-solution
* how to complete a task where the normal actions aren't working (live only in knowledge base). Example: if you have a corrupted TC/ICP. State the problem, give the resolution
Error message
* particular problem-solution article where the error message tells you the problem: Your mtu size is too small. Include a screenshot of error message, state the problem, then give the solution (partial example: https://wiki.umn.edu/UMNSPD/AnyConnect)
Reference
* vendor user documentation, terminology definitions. Good example: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4167. Bad example: Mac address wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAC_address. What they need is short one-sentence description of what a Mac address is and how to diagram showing you how to find it
Stephen also told us the story of Sabre Holdings, who, like many large companies, was trying to encourage its employees to participate in their internal knowledge base. Corporate knowledge bases are notorious for having a difficult time encouraging employees to participate, both in adding and utilizing the information. Sabre's system was no exception.]]>The team implemented a new system, dubbed Sabre Town. They integrated gaming elements, like points, levels, and unlocked functionality, to the day-to-day usage.
For example, answering questions earned the employee points, while being voted best answer earned additional points. Other functions, such as viewing other profiles and asking questions also earned points. As the employee accrued points, they were given broader access to functionality, such as posting more pictures to their profiles. The profile pictures became a badge of honor, representing how engaged they were in the system.
Stephen told us the higher usage yielded great results: Most questions are answered within 24 hours, with 60% of the questions being answered within the first hour of posting. Each question receives an average of 9 responses. Sabre has measured more than $150,000 in immediate, direct savings for the company from the system (with much greater benefits estimated, but not yet directly measured). Most interestingly, 65% of all Sabre employees become active Sabre Town members in the first 3 months, with more than 90% of all employees active today.
The draft questions are:
The concern from the technical SMEs is this. When we create KB articles for our own team's internal use only, that we want on the new KB, will a level of edit exist that will 'make it difficult' to get this accomplished?
Also I think I am correct when I explain to them that the Knowledge Management team's first priority is getting content out for the UM's general audience. Right?
]]>I'd like to echo the statement that level 2 types are a great place to capture knowledge. Folks that like to work in level 2 environment have a great blend of customer and technical expertise. Usually pretty good at explaining things. This would be a natural extension of their role, assuming they have time.
Here's a link to the SN introduction to knowledgebase on their wiki. Check it out!
http://wiki.service-now.com/index.php?title=Introduction_to_Knowledge_Base
]]>Samuel Johnson ( 1709 - 1784) was a poet, essayist, moralist, literary critic, biographer, editor and creator of the Dictionary of the English Language, a work which was only surpassed by the publication of the Oxford English Dictionary 150 years later.
He made this comment above on his first visit to Richard Owen Cambridge, who owned both an impressive art collection and an extensive library. After a hasty introduction, Johnson ran to the library. The quote was Johnson's answer to Cambridge's question as to why he would spend so much time examining the books in his library.
Of course, Boswell was there to record the moment. He does't record whether Johnson asked to borrow any books!
For hundreds of years, the library has been the state of the art knowledge base. In my undergrad years here at the U, Walter and Wilson libraries still had card catalogs, those large and impressive "databases" of knowledge meta data. Now you can view or download information from libraries around the world. What a radical transformation, just in my lifetime!
Today, the problem is not finding the right books that have the information we need, but how to find useful information in the glut of data available at our fingertips across a whole range of media. More and more we rely on knowledge that lies outside our heads. More and more, it's more about knowing where to find something, rather than knowing it ourselves. Being able to locate that information quickly, and being able to trust what we find, is critical to making knowledge management work. It's no easy task.
]]>The glossary is actually in Google Docs, and should be accessible and editable by anyone with an active internet ID and the URL.
Feel free to comment on the page or here if you have any questions or concerns or a much more elegant way to go about it.
]]>Feel free to discuss in the comments as well in case we want to flesh-out a question. I'll do my best to pick out the questions we're confident about and add them to the body of this post.
Questions from the comments so far:
UMContent workflow currently locks the knowledge article up, so that no one else can work on it.. How can we in Administration kick someone out of the system?
Can you have different workflow for different types of knowledge articles?
Can article go to group for assignment or everyyone in the group?
Can we add a critical vs. low priority to a knowledge article, depending on if work around etc.?
Can comments be visible to general public. Are there rules that we can put around of when to get rid of?
If someone says that they don't like an article, can there be a comments screen pop to ask the question why?
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/the-enemy-of-my-enemy/
"Perhaps the most familiar parallel occurs in the social and political realms, as summed up by the adage, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." This truism, and related ones about the friend of my enemy, and so on, can be depicted in relationship triangles.
...
Social scientists refer to triangles like the one on the left, with all sides positive, as "balanced" -- there's no reason for anyone to change how they feel, since it's reasonable to like your friend's friends. Similarly, the triangle on the right, with two negatives and a positive, is considered balanced because it causes no dissonance; even though it allows for hostility, nothing cements a friendship like hating the same person.
Of course triangles can also be unbalanced. When three mutual enemies size up the situation, two of them -- often the two with the least animosity -- may be tempted to join forces and gang up on the third."
]]>