Taxonomy Based Design

An overview of using controlled lists to boost adoption, support change, and create a model for

compliance-by-default in SharePoint 2013

Overview

Implementation of records and information management systems can often suffer critically from a lack of user support.

This can lead to failure—and a hard recovery.

Use a taxonomy-based approach to design and configure new information systems and help users change without losing control.

2

Target Audience

Records, Information, and

Knowledge Management professionals

Information, Business, and

Enterprise Architects

Policy and Business Analysts

Managers and

Information Governors

DesignersSharePoint

Administrators

3

Background

This is a discussion of a SharePoint 2013 implementation in a large public sector organization.

This organization had several specific requirements, including:

• Retention and disposition of records,• Use of Functional Classification,• Legislative and Policy compliance,• Fiscal prudence,• No custom code, i.e., customization through configuration.

4

Key Points

1. Controlled Lists = Compliance by Default

2. How to Build from sourcesi. Build a taxonomy derived from rules

ii. Look to integrate through design and configuration of features

3. Problem Scenario and Core Problems:i. Complicated Policies

ii. Lack of Understanding

iii. Waste(d) / Opportunity

4. Case Study: Engage, Iterate, Prototype, Release

5. Identify Roll-out opportunitiesi. Something specific and tangible

6. Educate, Train, Coach, Release, Support

5

Controlled List

Use a single, standardized list to form the backbone of your design.

This becomes the basis for your compliance model.

6

Apply Controlled Lists

Build taxonomies or lists that you can reference, source, or call back to.

Lookup tables or other reference tools can help users make sense of what they need to work with on a just-in-time basis.

Use the controlled list(s) to build system features that enable automation (e.g., templates, workflows, sites, libraries, etc.).

7

How to Build a Useful Taxonomy from Source Documents

Analyse source documents for key words, phrases, time periods, or other requirements.

Sort into groups and order groups in a list:

• Create categories of like things (e.g., HR, Finance, Project, Communications, etc.).

Separate things to keep (retain) and get rid of (dispose, or archive):

• Keep 5 years, 10 years, 20 years, etc.,• Fewer groups is better – be concise.

8

Use sources such as records retention schedules to create your authoritative list.

For example, organize according to Function, Activity, Transaction, and Record Name.

9

Use the authoritative list to populate the SharePoint

Term Store.

This makes the list accessible to all Site Collections

subscribing to the Content Type Hub.10

The list on the left becomes the authoritative list in the SharePoint Term Store.

11

It is possible to consolidate groups, e.g., retention and disposition periods.

This significantly simplify your taxonomy and your build.

12

Use your authoritative list to start building system features.

For example, configure SharePoint IM Policies to reflect your (consolidated) retention / disposition classification.

13

Additional Lists

Just because you are using one controlled list doesn’t mean you can’t also use more than one.

Make sure to anchor or link-back to your authoritative list as you build out additional lists.

Take advantage of both user-defined terms (folksonomies), and controlled vocabulary terms (taxonomies).

14

Problem Scenario

Compliance

Delivery

15

Compliance

Employees / Users are required to manage records decisions and actions; e.g., duty to document.

As users, they have had to contend with what ever tools are available: e.g., file shares or un-configured SharePoint.

The ability to set and manage consistent, enterprise controls is limited and uncoordinated.

The results is that records are not controlled and users have few options to deliver on Information policy expectations even if they want to.

16

Delivery

Employees are compressed between the obligation to deliver and the ability to deliver.

Employees are evaluated on delivery, not compliance.

Employees often work around the technology – either to get work done or to customize to their preferences.

Employees end up frustrated when technology designed to enforce compliance gets in the way of their ability to deliver.

17

Core Problems

Policy and Practice

Design

Control and Use

18

Policy and Practice Problems

Information-specific policies (retention, disposition, protection, security, etc.) are often:

• Hard to understand, and• Abstracted from everyday.

As a result policy is poorly understood and anemically implemented.

This leads to wasted opportunity, but also an opportunity from waste.

19

Design Problems

Creating a system that users will embrace must deal with some basic (hard) truths.

Designs must reflect how people work, and also introduce creative disruption:

• Integrate common controls and let users customize.

If users cannot see themselves in the solution, they are not likely to embrace it;

• Everyone controls content differently.

20

Control Problems

Governance and Accountability demand compliance.

Users have neither the time nor mental energy to commit to change.

Users need to see how their effort produces an output.

There is a dis-connect between policy requirements and execution of those requirements by users.

21

Reflect How People Work

Users will find a way to get their work done.

Designers need to understand these processes.

22

Three Basic Truths

1. Users do not care about Records or Information Management.

2. There is a practical limit to how many rules and procedures users will tolerate.

3. Users will not memorize complex folder structures (e.g., Functional Classification-based) unless they absolutely have to.

23

Case Study

Taxonomy used to classify content based on work being done by users.

Solution design based on compliance-by-default configuration.

Shift from folder-based structure to metadata-based information architecture.

24

Folders25

Who Moved My Workbench?

Innovation tools can disrupt more than just a work process.

They can also disrupt a user’s sense of control.

Even when dented and bent users still trust their workbenches; don’t take that away from them.

26

Solution: Flexible Change

Opportunity to embrace new models of creating, searching, and retrieving content.

Metadata is a powerful tool for creating new user experiences.

Beware the pitfalls:

• Integrate common tools and features,• Create continuity, and• Help Users see themselves using the new design.

27

Strategic Plan

Engage

IteratePrototype

Release

28

Case Study Summary

Old Design Old Design Problems

Folders 1 mental model only; a bit tyrannical

Project Phases Inconsistent • use of folder structure• naming / description

Weak Management Poor version control; dubious authoritative sources

No automation Clutter & junk stick around

New Design New Design Problems

Libraries & Metadata Different design = labour to learn

Change Risk to success

Compliance Still not a very compelling driver

29

New Design Helps Solve Old Design Problems

Metadata • Views • Access• Default classification• Search• Retrieval• Security• Privacy• eDiscovery,• Open Data• Freedom of Information• Retention• Disposition• Audit• Information Governance

Case Study Summary

30

Roll-Out Opportunities

Soft-launch has limited use.

Find partner projects to help implement.

Your new model should be integrated as a regular way of getting work done rather than as a competing option.

31

Soft Launch

Best suited for users who are willing to try something new and stick with it.

Poorly suited for naysayers, change curmudgeons, or busy managers.

Approach as an opportunity to get feedback and iterate.

32

Participating Partners

Document expected activities and outcomes; be clear on scope and effort.

Ensure that partners know what they have to do to be successful, and how to do it.

Pick some specific areas to focus on; too much scope can result in too little delivery.

33

Managed Revisions

Building your solution based on a controlled vocabulary like a taxonomy means you can configure compliance-by-default.

Users don’t have to become Records Management experts in order to comply with complex policy requirements.

Using metadata to implement a taxonomy-based information architecture gives you the flexibility to respond to user concerns without losing the thread of your design.

34

Knowledge Markers

People need to understand how to use your solution.

Most users will need to hear your message a number of times, a number of ways.

Prepare to:

• Educate,• Train,• Coach,• Support.

35

Integrated Information Model

The new way of doing things should be similar to the old way of doing things; make changes gradually.

People get accustomed to a certain process; too much change is mentally overwhelming and can lead to apathy or antipathy.

Users need to see themselves (or how they can work successfully) in your new model.

36

Always try to

demonstrate expectation:

click this, get that.

37

Summary

Use taxonomies to boost adoption and support change.

Why?

You enhance responsiveness to users’ (unique) needs without sacrificing your ability to track how each customized work space resolves back to your authoritative controlled vocabulary and your ability to demonstrate compliance with complex policy requirements.

38

Perfect isn’t good enough; your solution

has to be useable.

39

Creative Disruption; Applied Information Management; Knowledge Strategy

Visit www.cannonspark.ca for more insight and resources.