Selecting taxonomy software who why how l.jpg
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 22

Selecting Taxonomy Software Who, Why, How PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 61 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Selecting Taxonomy Software Who, Why, How. Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services http://www.kapsgroup.com. Agenda. Introduction: Basic Decision Context What, Why, and How Evaluating Software Features – good, bad, and ugly

Download Presentation

Selecting Taxonomy Software Who, Why, How

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Selecting taxonomy software who why how l.jpg

Selecting Taxonomy Software Who, Why, How

Tom ReamyChief Knowledge Architect

KAPS Group

Knowledge Architecture Professional Services

http://www.kapsgroup.com


Agenda l.jpg

Agenda

  • Introduction: Basic Decision Context

    • What, Why, and How

  • Evaluating Software

    • Features – good, bad, and ugly

    • History, Philosophy, and Evolution

  • Conclusion


  • Kaps group general l.jpg

    KAPS Group: General

    • Knowledge Architecture Professional Services

    • Virtual Company: Network of consultants – 12-15

    • Partners – Convera, Inxight, FAST, etc.

    • Consulting, Strategy, Knowledge architecture audit

    • Taxonomies: Enterprise, Marketing, Insurance, etc.

    • Services:

      • Taxonomy development, consulting, customization

      • Technology Consulting – Search, CMS, Portals, etc.

      • Metadata standards and implementation

      • Knowledge Management: Collaboration, Expertise, e-learning

      • Applied Theory – Faceted taxonomies, complexity theory, natural categories


    Varieties of taxonomy software l.jpg

    Varieties of Taxonomy Software

    • Taxonomy Management

      • Multi-Tes, Data Harmony, SchemaLogic

    • Distributed Taxonomy Development

      • Wordmap, Wikionomy

    • Text Analytics – Entity Extraction

      • ClearForest, Inxight, Teragram

    • Auto-Categorization

      • ClearForest, Inxight, Teragram

    • Embedded software – Content Management, Search


    Why taxonomy software l.jpg

    Why Taxonomy Software?

    • If you have to ask, you can’t afford it

    • Spreadsheets

      • Good for calculations, days of taxonomy development over

      • (almost)

    • Ease of use – more productive

      • Increase speed of taxonomy development

      • Better Quality – synonyms, related terms, etc.

    • Distributed development – lower cost, user input (good and bad)


    Decision points l.jpg

    Decision Points

    • Dedicated taxonomy management software

      • Small company, specialized taxonomy

    • Real issue is how it will be integrated

    • Text analytics / auto-categorization

      • Dedicated software or use features of CM and/or enterprise search

    • Combination of dedicated and embedded

      • Integration – export and import is critical

    • Integration with Policy / Procedure

      • Distributed contributions


    Taxonomy how will it be used l.jpg

    Taxonomy – How will it be used?

    • Browse front end to portal

    • Search engine indexing

      • Keyword searching

      • Hierarchical browsing – formal structure

    • Faceted navigation

      • Subject taxonomy and lots of metadata

    • Controlled vocabulary for entering metadata

    • Applications – text and data mining, alerts, etc.

    • Semantic Infrastructure


    Evaluating taxonomy software historical perspective four methods l.jpg

    Evaluating Taxonomy Software Historical Perspective: Four Methods

    • Spreadsheets were good enough for my father

    • Flip a Coin

      • 50-50 chance

    • Ask a Friend (Industry Recommendation)

      • Historical Accident?

    • Feature Check List and Score

      • Basic taxonomy functionality

    • Which method produces different results?


    Evaluating taxonomy software feature checklist and score basic features l.jpg

    Evaluating Taxonomy SoftwareFeature Checklist and Score: Basic Features

    • New, copy, rename, delete, merge

      • Branches not just nodes

    • Scope Notes

    • Spell check

    • Search – all parts and selected (only taxonomy nodes)

    • Names and Identifiers for terms and nodes

    • Versioning


    Evaluating taxonomy software feature checklist and score usability l.jpg

    Evaluating Taxonomy SoftwareFeature Checklist and Score: Usability

    • Ease of use – copy, paste, rename, merge, etc.

    • User Documentation, user manuals, on-line help, training and tutorials

    • Visualization

      • file structure, tree

      • Hierarchy and alphabetical?

    • Automatic Taxonomy/Node Generation

      • Nonsense for Taxonomy

      • Node – suggestions – perhaps

      • List of terms out of context versus reading


    Evaluating taxonomy software feature checklist and score additional features l.jpg

    Evaluating Taxonomy SoftwareFeature Checklist and Score: Additional Features

    • Language support – international

      • If you have need for it

    • Scalability – Size of taxonomy rarely important

      • More important for auto-categorization

    • Import-Export – XML and SKOS

    • Support standards – NISO, etc.

    • Mapping between taxonomies

    • API / SDK

    • Security, Access Rights, Roles – See integration


    Evaluating taxonomy software advanced features taxonomy as platform l.jpg

    Evaluating Taxonomy SoftwareAdvanced Features – Taxonomy as Platform

    • Text Analytics – multiple document types

    • Entity Extraction

      • Multiple types, custom classes

    • Auto-categorization

      • Training sets

      • Terms – literal strings, stemming, dictionary of related terms

      • Rules – simple – position in text (Title, body, url)

      • Advanced – saved search queries (full search syntax)

      • NEAR, SENTENCE, PARAGRAPH

      • Boolean – X NEAR Y and Not-Z

    • Advanced Features

      • Facts / ontologies /Semantic Web – RDF +


    Evaluating taxonomy software philosophy perspective l.jpg

    Evaluating Taxonomy Software “Philosophy” Perspective

    • Self-Knowledge is the highest form of knowledge.

    • It’s not what you do, it’s who you know.

      • Importance of who on team

    • Life is meaningless and absurd

      • And so are most search/categorization results

    • Beauty and Meaning are in the eye of the beholder

      • Raise your hand if you think I’m more beautiful than …

    • “The real constitution of things is accustomed to hide itself”

      • Beware 2.0 “solutions”


    Self knowledge is the highest form of knowledge l.jpg

    Self Knowledge is the highest form of knowledge

    • Start with self knowledge – KA audit – content, users, technology, business and information behaviors

    • Develop a model of taxonomy use in your enterprise

    • Ask Experts – Taxonomy is not for faint of heart

    • If test – use own content

      • Balance of current application and platform

      • Use the test to get a head start on taxonomy development

    • Spend more time on self knowledge than vendor capability.


    Evaluating taxonomy software self knowledge distributed model of taxonomy in action l.jpg

    Evaluating Taxonomy SoftwareSelf Knowledge – Distributed model of taxonomy in action

    • People

      • Interdisciplinary Team

      • Knowledge architects, editors, SME, users

    • Roles

      • Select and implement taxonomy software, input into CM, Search

      • Care and feeding of taxonomies, metadata, vocabularies

      • Initial filter of user input, monitoring user input, answer questions

      • Provide input – what works and not, new terms

    • Technology

      • Develop taxonomies, vocabularies, facets

      • Integrate taxonomy into CM, search, applications

    • Activities

      • Information needs and behaviors – support with advanced features


    It s not what you know it s who you know design of the taxonomy selection team l.jpg

    It’s not what you know, it’s who you knowDesign of the Taxonomy Selection Team

    • Traditional Candidates - IT

    • Experience with large software purchases

      • Search/Categorization is unlike other software

    • Experience with needs assessments

      • Need more – know what questions to ask, knowledge audit

    • Objective criteria

      • Looking where there is light?

      • Asking IT to select taxonomy software is like asking a construction company to select the design of your house.

    • They have the budget

      • OK, they can play.


    It s not what you know it s who you know design of the taxonomy selection team17 l.jpg

    It’s not what you know, it’s who you knowDesign of the Taxonomy Selection Team

    • Traditional Candidates - Business Owners

    • Understand the business

      • But don’t understand information behavior

    • Focus on business value, not technology

      • Focus on semantics is needed

    • They can get executive sponsorship, support, and budget.

      • OK, they can play


    It s not what you know it s who you know design of the taxonomy selection team18 l.jpg

    It’s not what you know, it’s who you knowDesign of the Taxonomy Selection Team

    • Traditional Candidates - Library

    • Understand information structure

      • But not how it is used in the business

    • Experts in search experience and categorization

      • Suitable for experts, not regular users

    • Experience with variety of search engines, taxonomy software, integration issues

      • OK, they can play


    It s not what you know it s who you know design of the taxonomy selection team19 l.jpg

    It’s not what you know, it’s who you knowDesign of the Taxonomy Selection Team

    • Interdisciplinary Team, headed by Information Professionals

    • Relative Contributions

      • IT – Set necessary conditions, support tests

      • Business – provide input into requirements, support project

      • Library – provide input into requirements, add understanding of search semantics and functionality

    • IP – Rank the relative contributions

      • Knowledge Audit – understand information behaviors

      • Taxonomy in full context


    Evaluating taxonomy software evolutionary approach l.jpg

    Evaluating Taxonomy SoftwareEvolutionary Approach

    • Eliminate the unfit

      • Filter One- Ask Experts - reputation, research – Gartner, etc.

        • Market strength of vendor, platforms, etc.

        • Look for minimum features,

      • Filter Two – Technology Filter – match to your overall scope and capabilities – Filter not a focus

      • Filter Three – Focus Group one day visit – 3-4 vendors

      • Filter Four – deep pilot (2) – advanced, integration

    • Evolve higher life forms

      • Focus on working relationship with vendor.

      • Focus on ease of customization


    Conclusion l.jpg

    Conclusion

    • Start with self-knowledge

    • Taxonomy is not an end it itself – what will you use it for?

    • Basic Features are only filters, not scores

    • Integration – need an integrated team (IT, Business, KA)

    • Integration – right balance, location (dedicated or embedded)

    • Integration – Distributed model of taxonomy development and applications

      • Central team and distributed authors, users

      • CM, Sharepoint, Search, Advanced Applications


    Questions l.jpg

    Questions?

    Tom [email protected]

    KAPS Group

    Knowledge Architecture Professional Services

    http://www.kapsgroup.com


  • Login