Customers taking control

"Call centres give poor service", says the BBC. Hardly a surprise. Could it be that people are realising that customers don't appreciate the increasing distance between them and the people with the knowledge? Are we learning yet that a headset, £5.50/hr and a CMS doesn't replace real expertise?

Customers want honesty and openness. With honesty and openness comes trust, probably the key determinant in any B2C relationship, particularly over the web (see the excellent Stanford Guidelines for Web Credibility for more).

So let's give them what they want!

I think it's time to loosen the reins a bit. Yes, give out your direct line number! Yes, let your staff blog about your products and services! Sure, maintaining the brand is important, but think of the brand value in letting the experts in your company talk directly to the world!

The first hurdle for many will probably be reworking the communications modus operandi. The 'rules of engagement' can be tricky for corporate bloggers and management alike. Most businesses use a communcations channel so tightly controlled that it could almost be called censorship. Opening this up is a brave step and will understandably unnerve some marketers and senior managers.

It's all about finding the right balance of control and supervision. Hold on too tight and you end up with an environment where employees feel patronised and scared to post lest they incur the wrath of management. Too little control, and you slip into the quagmire of unprofessionalism, gossip and even libel.

I think Sun's blogging policy has it about right. It doesn't insult the intelligence of employees, but it still establishes what can and can't be done in clear terms.

Let's hope businesses see past short-term jitters and begin opening up to these increasingly disenfranchised customers. Is talking to them really such a risk?

Two Google tips

One of the things I like most about KM and IA is the variety. Some days require you to put your head in the clouds and considery strategy, policy and other abstract concepts. Other days, you'll need to nosedive back through those clouds and get stuck in with some practical, 'here-and-now' solutions.

I'm currently putting the finishing touches to a workshop titled 'Practical Internet Searching'. As the name implies, I'm taking a pragmatic approach. Google seems to be a bit of a dirty word in the info management field these days (this could uncharitably be interpreted as motivated by either hubris or fear) but, although we can and should educate users about the vast array of tools at their disposal, most simply want to use their favourite tool more effectively.

I’m afraid I’m not able to publish the full course contents, but I’d like to share two nice features for your arsenal. Give them a whirl and let me know if you find them useful.

Numrange:
Example:

Best Picture Oscar 1950..1960

This searches for any number within the designated range. Particularly useful for dates, model numbers, or even prices.

The ~ (tilde) operator:
Example:

US ~foreign ~policy

This seems to be Google’s first step towards integrating synonym searching and maybe even taxonomy. I’ve no idea how the authority list is constructed or maintained, but my first impressions are that it successfully blends Google’s strong usability with a dash of the more sophisticated techniques that ‘our kind’ have long been wishing for.

An overlooked dimension?

I've always had a sneaking concern that sound has been a much overlooked topic in interaction design, so I was delighted to find Max Lord's excellent article Why Is That Thing Beeping? A Sound Design Primeron Boxes and Arrows.

In my experience, sounds either really help or really hinder a user experience; there doesn't seem to be much middle ground. Some examples of the former:

• Sounds that tie in closely with product branding. Could you draw me Intel's logo? No? Could you hum me their jingle?

• Catchy sounds used in entertainment (think Family Fortunes' famous 'eh-uh' wrong answer sound, or Countdown's time out jingle)

• Extremely simple reinforcement sounds for important transactions (pedestrian crossings, ATM beeps).

But when sounds fail, they serve only to annoy:

• The Windows startup chime

• Websites that launch into unexpected and unwelcome music (the one guaranteed way to ensure your user leaves in under 5 seconds)

• Most polyphonic ringtones.

The term 'information overload' usually refers primarily to the visual and cognitive burden information poses, but I suspect we run the risk of sonic information overload too without careful controls. I'll admit use my iPod as a way to wrest back control of one of my senses - perhaps a mild rebellion against the busy urban environment in which I live. I suppose it's the aural equivalent of pretending to read a newspaper on the Tube to avoid awkward eye contact.

I do find myself wondering just what future there is for sound design in interaction design, however. There's no doubt it's come a long way. Think back to the advent of the CD-Rom - every 'multimedia' project demanded a piano soundtrack, even if there was absolutely no benefit to the user experience (I have slightly bitter memories of being marked down heavily for omitting this in a University assignment). Luckily, this sort of use of sound now seems as dated as the 'information superhighway'.

The problem I have is that sound is still a medium that interrupts more than just the intended recipient. In a solo environment this isn't an issue, but in a quiet office it can be highly disruptive and embarrassing. I'm sure we've all wanted to throw ringing mobiles out of the window at times. Maybe the answer lies with use of other senses? I'm finding myself increasingly interested by the concept of haptic (touch-related) methods of interaction and response, which provide a similar alert without the need to disturb others. I'll freely admit it's not a field I know much about, so I'll endeavour to report back once I've explored it a little.
Watch this space... or should that be listen out for more?

Information auditing

The latest issue of Freepint has a nice little article on information auditing. I'm very much of the opinion that KM needs a firm IM foundation (a future post will take on the challenge of defining the clear waters between the two) so it makes sense to start with a systematic analysis of organisational information.

In very simplified form, an information audit looks at:

A) How the organisation uses information
B) How it should use information
C) How to bring A) closer to B)

One of the leading exponents of the information audit is Elizabeth Orna, who has just released an updated version of her excellent Practical Information Policies (ISBN 0566076934). I was fortunate to attend an Aslib course by Elizabeth a few months back. She's an intelligent speaker with a precise style greatly in contrast to some of the ponderous KM prose we're often exposed to.

The thing that strikes me as both the greatest strength and the greatest challenge of an information audit is the lack of standardised approach. For the first-time auditor (and, indeed, the second, where I currently find myself), this creates the unique challenge of "Where the hell do I start?"

What I've learned is that you should start in a way that suits your organisation and your own style of analysis. I initially became frustrated at the absence of a 'set in stone' approach, but I've learned to have faith in my skill as an information professional and trust that I will find a suitable approach. So far, so good. I'll let you know how it goes with my current audit.

Online learning at its most effective?

Recently, I've been enjoying playing the MMORPG (Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game) Final Fantasy XI. The premise is simple - progress through the story by defeating increasingly tough monsters and boosting your character's strength.

What has struck me today is that it provides a fascinating parallel KM universe. Bear with me...

After an initial period of alignment to learn rules and achieve basic competency, it soon becomes apparent that collaboration is preferable to going it alone. Thus, by level 10, most players abandon the solo approach and begin to form parties with others.

These parties have their own microcosmic team dynamics: leadership, concensus, teamworking. Agreed roles and responsibilities are essential: a White Mage heals other characters, a Warrior deals damage, etc. Parties must, of course, contain a good cross-section of skills and abilities - for instance a party of 6 Warriors simply won't work. There are some obvious parallels here with teamwork in the business environment and the benefits of, say, Belbin profiling.

The most notable product of this team work is a remarkable culture of altruism that persists throughout FFXI. The developers have intelligently avoided spoon-feeding players, meaning that interaction with others is vital to proceed in the game. Even our old friend the Community of Practice is represented via linkshells, virtual groups of like-minded friends. As with CoPs, the best provide a platform for social networking, healthy debate and learning for the good of all.

Players often give up valuable time to help others, either through the official mentoring scheme, helping newer adventurers to fight ("power-levelling"), or simply answering questions asked by those at the end of their tethers.

Why do they invest this time? (See also the old KM chestnut: "What's in it for me?") I'm convinced that the lack of competition between players is a major factor. Players cannot attack each other or hinder others' progress in any meaningful way*. In this utopian world, knowledge is not a means of preserving an advantage over others - it is, instead, a way to further the pursuit of goals.

Perhaps I'm wrong and FFXI is just an escapist world where politics, war and rivalry mean little. Perhaps it's just a place for people to go to act in ways they would never in real life. Still, it's worth considering how we can reduce the competitive element of knowledge sharing and attempt to foster the 'what's mine is yours' approach in the real world.

*As an aside, other MMORPGs that have allowed competition have, perhaps unsurprisingly, spawned online homicide, cons and muggings. Sometimes thefts have even deprived players of items that have value in the real world.

A self-indulgent treatise on semiotics and why "You Are Driving A Volvo" isn't shit

Primary reason for the lack of updates is that I was in London all last week on a course (OLAP cube analysis if you must know). As always on these occasions, I popped over to Tate Modern for an hour or so. It's become like visiting an old friend. Two new items of note: Eliasson's The Weather Project installation and Julian Opie's You Are Driving A Volvo. An unknown to me, but it transpires he's responsible for Blur's pop art-esque Best Of.. cover. Always quite liked that and some of his other works are pretty good too.

Cue a discussion on one of my messageboards - the old "Is this art?" debate. Me? I think that if you have to ask, it's definitely art. But how can I justify that for what is, after all, just a block of wood shaped and painted like a car?

On consideration, I think it appeals to me thanks to my interest in semiotics. Some definitions:

"The study of doctrine of signs, sometimes supposed to be a science of signs; the systematic investigation of the nature, properties, and kinds of sign, especially when undertaken in a self-conscious way."

"The theory of symbols and signs which explores how people glean meaning from words, sounds, and pictures. Sometimes used in researching names for various products and services. "

Clearly it's the symbol of a car that conjures up everything that we know about cars ("They go fast", "They use petrol", "I was sick in the back of a Toyota Corolla" etc). The inferred relationships are far more interesting than the car itself. Semiotics is one of those fascinating fields that seems to blend cognitive psychology, design and philosophy in one. I always appreciate ways of elevating the day-to-day mundanity of 'things' to a higher, more general level. I don't agree with Plato's theory of Forms (as I understand it, that each object we encounter is a flawed copy of a divine blueprint which only the enlightened can see) but I must admit I admire where he's coming from and the sheer audacity of his thoughts.

This all brings me round to the real issue: why I actually quite like my job. Semiotics is certainly a big feature of information architecture, along with a whole host of other fields (programming, graphic design, Human-Computer Interaction, research, psychology, information management) that run the gamut from the highly technical to the hand-wavingly vague. I can't think of many other jobs that have that sort of variety.