|
JoAnn Hackos, PhD
CIDM Director
www.infomanagementcenter.com
Feeling Comfortable with Mature Processes
ODS continues to surprise Dr. Q. She's being following their
progress for several years, ever since the software
engineering area of the company earned a Level 4 in process
maturity from the Software Engineering Institute (SEI).
Implementing Level 4 processes had enabled ODS to turn
things around from a money-losing to a money-making company.
The careful application of systems thinking helped ODS
management recognize that they needed to abandon some parts
of their older technology and focus on customer-driven
changes to their new products.
Cindy Andaluse had been promoted to senior
information-development manager after the long-time manager
had left for another company. She was aware of the progress
he had made in stabilizing processes within the
organization, but she also knew there was much to do for the
technical communicators to equal the accomplishments of the
software and hardware engineers. Cindy walked into a budding
Level 3 organization; her job was to move it to Level 4.
Cindy worked closely with Dr. Q to define the
characteristics they needed to have in place to be
recognized as a Level 4 in the IPMM (Information Process
Maturity Model):
- Strong development processes to support the information
life cycle and complete dedication among staff members in
following the processes. The three geographically
distributed locations of the ODS information-development
team meant that common processes were somewhat difficult
to institute.
- A new prominence for customer studies. Although they had
conducted several customer studies in the past three
years, Cindy wanted everyone to be involved in knowing
customers better.
- For several years, ODS technical communicators had a
standard template and standard information types fully
developed. Everyone was quite committed to following the
templates as they developed their documentation set. Cindy
knew, however, that they wanted to use a more modular
approach to design, in keeping with the modular design of
the flagship product. The developers were already using
object-oriented design methods; publications needed to
follow suit.
- As a new director, Cindy had been given budgetary control
over the department's activities. They had gathered
considerable data about the cost of individual projects.
Now Cindy wanted to find new ways to reduce development
costs while improving the quality of deliverables.
Dr. Q made it clear to Cindy that she had a strong base from
which to work but she needed to solidify the previous gains
and introduce more innovative approaches into the
department. Without innovation, it was all too likely that
they would develop a complacent attitude and become
increasingly bureaucratic. Dr. Q pointed out that she had
seen too many Level 3 organizations turn into dead-end
bureaucracies because everyone worked so well. If an
organization failed to pursue continuous innovation and
improvement in processes and products, they would cease to
be interesting places to work. Cindy and the previous
manager had attracted a first-rate staff; they needed to
keep them motivated.
Innovation in Design
John Marcus headed the ODS content-management team. For the
past two years, John had led the development of their CMS.
Everyone was using a standard Document Type Definition (DTD)
and an XML editor to create their documents, but they were
still creating books. John was anxious to move toward a
modular approach, but that would take a rethinking of their
information design. Here was an opportunity, though, to
pursue an innovative approach to information development
that Cindy was pushing.
John had heard Mark Baker talk about subject-based design at
the Content Management Strategies conference. He set up a
team of staff members interested in information architecture
to devise a modular approach based on subject matter rather
than products. The team found a solution linked to the
object-oriented design of the product. The engineers were
creating use cases around functions that customers wanted to
perform with the product and developing suites of
functionality related to those business tasks. John's team
decided to follow the same pattern.
They started with an analysis of the customer goals and
tasks, based upon the results of three previous customer
studies. Once they had a matrix of duties (like customizing
the installation and administering the operating system) and
tasks (like redesigning the user interface and adding new
software to the system), they were able to identify content
associated with each cell in the matrix.
Writers in the group were assigned certain tasks on which to
develop content. For each cell, the assigned writer
identified the knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSA)
required to be successful in performing the task. At the
same time, an instructional designer from the sister
training organization identified the learning objective
associated with the task. Together, the writer and
instructional designer determined what content needed to be
developed, what skills the user needed to have from
training, and what abilities in terms of analysis, design,
and task execution were needed to complete the task.
The writers could then focus on developing the best content
to help users gain an understanding of the task. Some of the
information was conceptual, some procedural, and some was
detailed reference material. The instructional designers
focused on creating learning situations in which the
learners had to use the information to solve particular
problems related to the task. Their scenario-based training
modules helped users relate use of the product to their
real-world situations. Once they had analyzed the situation
with the help of the conceptual information, they could
easily apply the procedural steps necessary to complete
particular tasks.
The new information design developed by John's team and
executed by the combined force of writers and instructional
designers was revolutionary for ODS's customers. One
customer called the CEO to tell him that he had never found
product information so valuable before.
A Level 4 Content-Management Solution
John and Cindy analyzed their current content-management
solution to determine if it could handle the changes to the
information design that had been developed by the
information architects. The system was certainly
comprehensive. They already were using workflow, version
control, security, and automated publishing of their XML
content into HTML, PDF, and print. But could the current
solution handle a modular approach to information design?
Finding the Best Solution
John, Cindy, and Dr. Q conduct an analysis of the existing
CMS. So far, ODS has used the system to manage documents and
control production processes. Their analysis shows that the
CMS was not originally designed to handle the control and
assembly of individual modules. Nor does their current DTD
support modular writing. They need a new solution.
First, they investigate the possibility of using the open
source IBM DTD called DITA (Darwin Information Typing
Architecture). DITA is modular by design. They can easily
adopt it to the modular structure they have in
mind—concepts, procedures, and reference material. They
will need to customize the DTD for their particular content,
but the structure adapts easily. John is able to design the
new DTDs.
Dr. Q suggests that they hire a system integrator to adopt
the existing CMS to their new requirements. The integrator
is able to provide a linking structure and a method of
assembling modules dynamically using a topic-map
architecture.
Getting the new technology in place is only half the battle.
The ODS technical communicators and instructional designers
are unfamiliar with modular, subject-based composition.
Cindy puts together a team and a pilot project to transform
their core information. As Dr. Q suggests, developing a
small set first in the pilot project enables them to test
the solution with an enthusiastic team before they try to
transform the entire department.
Although there are skeptics in their midst, the very nature
of a budding Level 4 information-development team means that
most staff member are willing to give the new idea a try.
They have all been intimately involved in studying their
customers. As a result, they recognize the need for
innovation in information delivery to better meet customer
needs. The entire department is user-focused, which means
that managers and staff work well together in developing a
vision of a new user experience once the information
transformation is complete.
If you've found yourself with a Level 4: Managed and
Sustainable organization, please send your stories to me at
.
In the next issue, I will report on the preliminary results
of our process maturity and content-management survey.
|
