How to get users to embrace metadata organization
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•594 views
This document discusses how to get users to appreciate metadata by reframing how they view and interact with it. It suggests translating traditional folders into a metadata structure and establishing sensible defaults to make metadata easier for users. While change can be difficult, implementing cool tricks and the right tools can help users recognize the benefits of metadata for organizing and collaborating on documents and projects.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to How to get users to embrace metadata organization
Similar to How to get users to embrace metadata organization (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
How to get users to embrace metadata organization
- 1. How to get users to love metadata
- 2. Our Problem
- 3. Our problem Am I wrong?
- 5. Why we love metadata Hi Metadata
- 6. Why we love metadata Why users don’t
- 7. Why users don’t Confused?
- 8. Change
- 9. Something must change… Fail!!!
- 10. FAIL!!! Learning
- 11. Change = Learning Reframing
- 12. Reframing the old to match the new Folders
- 14. Our folders
- 15. Our folders Team documents
- 16. Team documents Structure Team Documents Research Reports Contracts Working area
- 17. Structure / Collaboration • Moderatly structured • Used for reference only • Usually ‘archive’ type information • Metadata used to refine search results • Very low collaboration Research Reports • Highly structured • Metadata used to quickly find results • Low to medium collaboration Contracts Working • Very unstructured area • Very high collaboration How much?
- 18. How much metadata do we need? Research Reports • Some Contracts • A lot Working area • Little to none Fits all?
- 20. Translating folders to metadata Team Documents Research Reports Contracts Working area Our Metadata
- 21. Our libraries, columns and content types Belong to us?
- 22. Reports
- 23. Research reports Folder horizontal Column name Level 1 Year Level 2 Archived (yes/no) Contracts Research reports 2010 2011 2012 Archive 2009 2008
- 24. Contracts Contracts 2013 2014 Client C Signed Unsigned Folder horizontal Column name Level 1 Year Level 2 Client name Client D Signed Unsigned Level 3 Signed (yes/no) Working docs
- 25. Working documents Folder horizontal Column name Level 1 Documents type? • Personal document • Template • Minutes Done? Working Area Jan’s folder Minutes of meeting More stuff Peter’s folder Another messy folder Templates Minutes PDP
- 27. Resistance
- 29. The best tool for adding metadata Lol
- 30. Defaults
- 31. Defaults
- 32. Defaults, defaults, defaults!! Ain’t easy
- 33. Fast forward
- 35. Cool tricks
- 36. Cool tricks Not bad
- 37. Q&A
- 40. Thanks
- 41. THANK YOU
- 42. Backup slides
- 43. Backup: Change curve/Grief curve Shock Anger Denial Doubt Apathy Acknowledgement Acceptance and transition Exploring options
Editor's Notes
- This is a session about metadata, change and the role we, as consultants play in implementing it. This is not about changing user behaviour, this is about changing our own behaviour and changing the way we look at metadata and how we explain metadata to our users Users most of the time struggle with using metadata or refuse to use it at all. We’ve often gone through great lengths to come up with a lot of different columns for the user to fill in, then explain how fill them in. And then we try to explain the benefits of using views etc. But somehow users still have trouble relating to these changes, and they actually blame SharePoint. And label it as inflexible, a lot of work, difficult etc.
- The current and the new situation Let’s say we are now in a folder based environment. Like Livelink, or a file share. Users add all their documents to the folders The new situation will be a metadata based environment, where users categorise documents using metadata. Our problem is that users most of the time have been working with these folders for quite some time. And don’t yet fully understand the concept of metadata. So when users show resistance to our plans for implementing metadata, we tend to react like this (even if we’re not aware of it).
- We may not even be aware of the way our users see us. But this attitude can lead to even more resistance from our user community. When I first started as a SharePoint training with Shell, I was so convinced of this metadata story, that I took the same approach.
- Completely unaware of the way our users are starting to feel about metadata and SharePoint. We bravely proceed with our efforts to implements SharePoint. We create numerous columns, that usually do not make that much sense to users. This is because the metadata we think the user needs is usually metadata that only makes sense if you look at it from up high. So it will make sense on enterprise level, but not on departmental or user level. So we could end up confusing, and even frustrating our user community
- Why users don’t like metadata: Hopefully, at this stage, we are becoming aware of some resistance and frustration from the user community. So where does this come from, and how can we change our approach in such a way, users will, over time, embrace our efforts. First we must realise that moving away from folders, to a metadata based way of document management is a big change. Just because we ‘get it’ doesn’t mean our users do. Users usually experience the feeling of losing control and they fear it will all be ‘one big mess’ They feel it takes too much time to add all that metadata and it is much easier to put everything in a folder. And we tend to go overboard with our metadata. And on top of that, the metadata we come up with is metadata users cannot relate to. So we tend to go for ‘too big a bang’ (don’t mind the pun) All we manage to accomplish, is confusing the users
- So up until now we’ve managed to: Come up with complex metadata and confuse and frustrate our user community Something has to change. And this where usually thing go wrong. We provide more and more training to end users, handholding, floorwalking etc. We try to change the users!!!!
- We should not try to change the users, this is a battle we eventually will lose. Something in our approach must change.
- So instead of changing user behaviour, let’s change the way we approach the problem. Most of the time ‘Change = Learning’ What is learning Learning is relating something you don’t know, to something you do know. A new situation is like and old situation. Or is like a combination of different situations. What can we learn about folders? And what can we learn about metadata? So how can metadata be like folders? For this we can use a technique called reframing. We will Reframe the old situation to match the new The step from Learning to Reframing is important and we’ll need to consider it carefully. Compare new with old: What is the same? – we recognize – we feel comfortable What is different? – we want to understand – we feel uncomfortable
- What is reframing? Reframing had been used by therapist since the 1960’s. It is basically a technique to explain something old in a new way. And this is precisely what we are going to do to our folders. We are going to explain folders in such a way, that we can better relate them to metadata. And in the process we’ll also be reframing any reference users have to metadata. The trick here is to reframe both folders and metadata in such a way, that the user will come to understand that the two are actually a lot alike.
- How to reframe folders: So, what are folders really? Folders have always been a way of categorising information. They allow us to add context to our documents and to find our documents back by using that context. Think about a folder called ‘minutes of meeting’ Why do users like folders? Managing documents using folders is something we are all familiar with. And the hierarchy folders provide is close to how our brain works. Folders give us a nice visualisation of how our documents relate to each other. What do folders do? Folder do 3 things. Folders add context. By simply adding a document to a folder, we add context to that document Folders also filter, by opening the folder ‘2014’ we are basically filtering on the year 2014 And most importantly, folders are a way of visualising how our documents relate to our organisation. And this one is very tricky to get around. So a folder, in a way, is ‘metadata’ What is problem with folders? 1 dimensional approach, but it worked well… Another aspect of folders we must reframe, is the storing of documents. In a folder structure we first select the folder where we want to store a document. And then we save the document. So we first select the ‘metadata’ and then save the document. In a metadata driven environment, we first select the ‘folder’.
- Now we’ll take a simple folder structure. Something you would typically see people use. For the sake of time, we’ll use a rather flat structure. And we’ll reframe them, to fit our metadata philosophy
- In our folder structure we can identify 3 different area’s on top level: Research reports Contracts Deprartmental Now when we look at how we would use these different areas, we’ll see that they are fundamentally different
- Each of these area’s will be used in a different ways. With regards to Storing, finding and collaboration. And each area differs in the way it is structured. We will need to keep this in mind when we convert our folders to metadata The research reports area is usually used as reference. If we search this area, we usually don’t really know what results we are looking for. The contracts area is highly structured. If we search this area, we usually know exactly what we are looking for The working area is the least structured of the three. And although the content is initially unstructured, it might be placed in a more structured environment later on.
- So you’ll see it is not enough to add some basic departmental metadata. One size does not fit all.
- We’ve now seen that the different root folders contain information that is fundamentally different in both collaboration and in structure. Because of this fundamental difference, we can decide to split our content into 3 different content types: Research reports Contracts Working documents To make things easier to understand for our users, we’ll also choose to create 3 different libraries on our site.
- So now we will have a closer look at the metadata we will need for our three content types.
- Do we actually need any metadata at all here?
- We have now managed to reframe folders in such a way we can translate them to relatable metadata. The metadata we now have makes sense to the user community. So we can now get rid of all the folders, have everything in 1 big list and only use metadata. Done right?
- Maybe this is enough for us, but not for our users
- Remember why our users don’t like metadata? Remember the 3 things folders do for us? Add context, filter and visualisation? The first 2 we’ve now taken care of. And yes, we could use grouped views to provide some visualisation, but remember the big bang? Take it slow!!
- Using tools to add metadata: There is a tool in SharePoint that allows us to add a lot of metadata automatically, and make the life of our users a lot easier. This is also a tool that will allow us to create a nice overview of how our information relates to the organisation And the nice thing is that is free (if you already have SP), out of the box and extremely easy to use
- You may all have seen that we can use folder default values (or one could even do this on library level) to add metadata to new documents. So if we stick with our trusted folder structure, translate that into metadata and add the metadata defaults to the folders. We basically have a best of both worlds situation, that suits both us and the end users. All metadata should be filled in through default values. Make sure all the ‘enterprise’ columns are filled in by site or library defaults. All local, or departmental metadata should be filled in through our folder structure. Please remember. This is step 1 of our change process, many more will follow. But please take your time!!
- Make sure that most of your metadata is filled in by using default values. You can even add your enterprise metadata to the metadata we’ve already discussed. As long as you make sure users don’t have to worry about it.
- By slowly introducing cool Sharepoint functionality like: Webparts Folderless views Grouping views Metadata navigation or even a dashboard page. Users will adjust to the new ways of working and grow more comfortable with metadata
- Hopefully over time our users will come to accept SharePoint and not only see the benefits of metadata. But also experience them.