Taxonomy Development Case Studies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services http://www.kapsgroup.com

Agenda Introduction Development Process – Examples Tale of Two Taxonomies – Best of Times and Worst of Times Conclusion

Taxonomy Development Process Foundation – Strategic & Business Context Focus Groups, contextual interviews Knowledge Architecture Audit – Knowledge Map Taxonomy Strategy/Model – forms, technology, people Existing taxonomic resources, software Draft Taxonomy Information Interviews, focus groups, card sorts Content Analysis, top down & bottom up Refine, feedback, pilot app Taxonomy Plans – Governance, Maintenance, Applications

Knowledge Architecture Audit: Knowledge Map Project Foundation Contextual Interviews Information Interviews App/Content Catalog User Survey Strategy Document Meetings, work groups Overview High Level: Process Community Info behaviors of Business processes Technology and content All 4 dimensions General Outline Broad Context Deep Details Complete Picture New Foundation

Taxonomy Development Process: Progressive Refinement Taxonomy Model Information Interviews Content Analysis Refine Map Community Governance Plan Buy/Find work groups Overview Info behaviors, Card Sorts Bottom Up Prototypes Interviews Evaluate Refine Interviews Develop, Refine General Outline Preliminary Taxonomy Taxonomy 1.0 Taxonomy 1.0-1.9 Tax 2.0 Taxonomy

Taxonomy Development: Tips and Techniques Foundation Strategic Foundation Info Problems – what, how severe Political environment – support, special interests Knowledge Architecture Audit – Self Knowledge Size, Major Org, Info environment Strategic Questions – why, what value from the taxonomy, how are you going to use it Technology Environment – ECM, Enterprise Search

Taxonomy Development: Tips and Techniques Taxonomy Foundation Variety of taxonomies – important to know the differences, when to use what. People: Get a good taxonomist! (Assign resources, learn) Library Science+ Cognitive Science + Cognitive Anthropology Technology Taxonomy Management, Visulaization Entity Extraction Content Structures: Get a good taxonomy! Glossary, Index, Pull from multiple sources Get a good document collection

Infrastructure Solutions: Taxonomy Development Taxonomy Model Enterprise Taxonomy No single subject matter taxonomy Need an ontology of facets or domains Standards and Customization Balance of corporate communication and departmental specifics At what level are differences represented? Customize pre-defined taxonomy – additional structure, add synonyms and acronyms and vocabulary Enterprise Facet Model: Actors, Events, Functions, Locations, Objects, Information Resources Combine and map to subject domains

Combination of top down and bottom up (and Essences) Taxonomy Development: Tips and Techniques Development and/or Customization Combination of top down and bottom up (and Essences) Top: Design an ontology, facet selection Bottom: Vocabulary extraction – documents, search logs, interview authors and users Develop essential examples (Prototypes) Most Intuitive Level – genus (oak, maple, rabbit) Quintessential Chair – all the essential characteristics, no more Work toward the prototype and out and up and down Repeat until dizzy or done Map the taxonomy to communities and activities Category differences Vocabulary differences

Taxonomy Development: Tips and Techniques Evaluate and Refine Formal Evaluation Quality of corpus – size, homogeneity, representative Breadth of coverage – main ideas, outlier ideas (see next) Structure – balance of depth and width Kill the verbs Evaluate speciation steps – understandable and systematic Person – Unwelcome person – Unpleasant person - Selfish person Avoid binary levels, duplication of contrasts Primary and secondary education, public and private

Taxonomy Development: Tips and Techniques Evaluate and Refine Practical Evaluation Test in real life application Select representative users and documents Test node labels with Subject Matter Experts Balance of making sense and jargon Test with representative key concepts Test for un-representative strange little concepts that only mean something to a few people but the people and ideas are key and are normally impossible to find

Enterprise Environment – Case Studies A Tale of Two Taxonomies It was the best of times, it was the worst of times Basic Approach Initial meetings – project planning High level K map – content, people, technology Contextual and Information Interviews Content Analysis Draft Taxonomy – validation interviews, refine Integration and Governance Plans

Enterprise Environment – Case One – Taxonomy, 7 facets Taxonomy of Subjects / Disciplines: Science > Marine Science > Marine microbiology > Marine toxins Facets: Organization > Division > Group Clients > Federal > EPA Instruments > Environmental Testing > Ocean Analysis > Vehicle Facilities > Division > Location > Building X Methods > Social > Population Study Materials > Compounds > Chemicals Content Type – Knowledge Asset > Proposals

Enterprise Environment – Case One – Taxonomy, 7 facets Project Owner – KM department – included RM, business process Involvement of library - critical Realistic budget, flexible project plan Successful interviews – build on context Overall information strategy – where taxonomy fits Good Draft taxonomy and extended refinement Software, process, team – train library staff Good selection and number of facets Final plans and hand off to client

Enterprise Environment – Case Two – Taxonomy, 4 facets Taxonomy of Subjects / Disciplines: Geology > Petrology Facets: Organization > Division > Group Process > Drill a Well > File Test Plan Assets > Platforms > Platform A Content Type > Communication > Presentations Issues Not enough facets Wrong set of facets – business not information Ill-defined facets – too complex internal structure

Enterprise Environment – Case Two – Taxonomy, 4 facets Environment Issues Value of taxonomy understood, but not the complexity and scope Under budget, under staffed Location – not KM – tied to RM and software Solution looking for the right problem Importance of an internal library staff Difficulty of merging internal expertise and taxonomy

Enterprise Environment – Case Two – Taxonomy, 4 facets Project Issues Project mind set – not infrastructure Wrong kind of project management Special needs of a taxonomy project Importance of integration – with team, company Project plan more important than results Rushing to meet deadlines doesn’t work with semantics as well as software

Enterprise Environment – Case Two – Taxonomy, 4 facets Research Issues Not enough research – and wrong people Interference of non-taxonomy – communication Misunderstanding of research – wanted tinker toy connections Interview 1 implies conclusion A Design Issues Not enough facets Wrong set of facets – business not information Ill-defined facets – too complex internal structure

Taxonomy Development Conclusion: Risk Factors Political-Cultural-Semantic Environment Not simple resistance - more subtle – re-interpretation of specific conclusions and sequence of conclusions / Relative importance of specific recommendations Understanding project scope Access to content and people Enthusiastic access Importance of a unified project team Working communication as well as weekly meetings

Conclusion Enterprise Context – strategic, self knowledge Importance of a good foundation Taxonomy Model Be Smart – beg, borrow, steal resources Importance of Taxonomy Vision Infrastructure resource, not a project Evolving – processes to direct the evolution Importance of Taxonomy Balance of expertise and local knowledge

Questions? Tom Reamy tomr@kapsgroup.com KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services http://www.kapsgroup.com