IWMW 1997: Information flow and the Institutional WWW

Southampton University Computing Services 05/01/23

Information Flow & the Institutional WWW

Colin K. Work

University of Southampton Computing Services


Scope of DiscussionScope of Discussion

• the institution’s WWW based information service

– courseware; research data etc. not included

• technology independent


What is “Information Flow” ?What is “Information Flow” ?

• The movement of information objects from point of origin to “target” user over time.– simple objects may combine to form complex objects– the object is modified along the way– the object may be used at different points in the flow– there is no “end user”

• ALL aspects of information provision should be considered, not just WWW


Managerial Attributes of Managerial Attributes of Information ObjectsInformation Objects

• Author: content of object• Owner (publisher): availability of object• Encoder/printer: data/text processing

• All objects should have a single “owner”, though they may have multiple authors/encoders

• There is also an implied attribute - the “Authority” of the object: if not made explicit, false assumptions may result


Information Flow & the WWWInformation Flow & the WWW

• A web page is a snapshot of the information flow– Where does it come from? Where is it going?

• Is the “snapshot” at the right point in the flow?• Does the “snapshot” carry the required authority?• Is ownership clear?• Is the author & owner aware of all uses of the

data.


Tools for Managing Information FlowTools for Managing Information Flow

• Information strategy: goal setting• Information policy: methodology for achieving

the goals• Acceptable use policy: regulatory constraints• Editorial board/Webmaster: enforces

application of above• Costs/charging: (real or notional)


How is the Flow Managed?How is the Flow Managed?

• No management

• Centralised management

• Distributed management


No Management - No Management - AdvantagesAdvantages

“our policy is not to have a policy”

• Rapid service growth• “Hot house” for development • minimal “Red Tape” • expediency & responsiveness


No Management - No Management - DisadvantagesDisadvantages

• institution lacks cohesive presentation• material may lack authority• uneven representation/presentation• navigational problems• contradictory material• maintenance issues• who is accountable?• inefficient use of resources


Centralised ModelCentralised Model

“the way we were”

Departments

Infoservicecentral

processing


Centralised - AdvantagesCentralised - Advantages

• little training/support required • consistency in style/presentation• good authority control• good quality control• good cost control/resource management• low risk• maximises efficient use of resources


Centralised - DisadvantagesCentralised - Disadvantages

• does not scale well (?)• potential bottleneck to information flow• perceived as restrictive - threat to

academic freedom• will tend toward conservative• unresponsive


Distributed ModelDistributed Model

Faculty/Dept. WWW Faculty/Dept. WWW Faculty/Dept. WWW

E d i t o r i a l B o a r d

institution home pages -who is responsible?


Distributed - AdvantagesDistributed - Advantages

• distributes the workload• reasonably responsive and flexible• greatly improves institutional WWW

“awareness”• departments/groups “in control”


Distributed - DisadvantagesDistributed - Disadvantages

• less of efficient use of resources• tends toward “no management” unless

– good info policy/strategy– editorial board in place

• requires good inter-department liaison• how is “institutional” WWW achieved?


Combined ModelsCombined Models

Distributed faculty/dept. web sites

Centrally managed institutional“top level” pages “Personal

Pages”

free fromeditorialcontrol withinacceptedconstraints(eg. AUP)

Edito

rial B

oard


Impediments to Information Impediments to Information FlowFlow

• Lack of information processing resources• Lack of IT skills• Inadequate technology• Attitudes:

– territoriality - “this is MY information!”– technophobia– resistance to change - “but we always do it this way”

• Management tools may be real or perceived impediment


Prospectus - Hard CopyProspectus - Hard CopyDepartments course info

Faculty

Other info(PR, Accomm.)

Editor(s)“UNIVERSITY”

authority

Print


Prospectus - WWW Ver. 1Prospectus - WWW Ver. 1Departments’ course info

Faculty


Editor(s)

“UNIVERSITY”

authority

Print

WWW

- reformatting- inappropriate design- inflexible- untimely



Faculty


Editor(s)

“UNIVERSITY”

authority

Print

WWW

“intercept”

- expedient- better format- flexible- no authority- quality control?



Faculty


Editor(s)

“UNIVERSITY”

authority

Print

WWW

Authority?Quality control?



Faculty


Editor(s)

“UNIVERSITY”

authority

Print

WWW- resource?- expertise?


Role of the “Webmaster”Role of the “Webmaster”and/or Editorial Board

• Advise on “flow management”• Authentication of information• Establishing liaison links• Enforcing policy• Facilitating and enabling• Promoting the service internally• Matching service to available resources


In Summary ...In Summary ...

• Info strategy & policy is required to establish and/or clarify responsibilities

• Editorial board/Webmaster must be empowered to enforce policy

• Distributed / Centralised models of management have strengths and weaknesses - choice may depend on organisation of the institution.


Questions: Questions:

How much time/money do you think is beingspent in total across your organisation puttingup WWW pages?

What sort of a service do you think you coulddevelop if you could harness that resource?

IWMW 1997: Information flow and the Institutional WWW

Education

Transcript of IWMW 1997: Information flow and the Institutional WWW