Give Me A DAM Reason To Come Back

A few years ago, a client had proposed a user incentive in which their digital asset system (DAM) would congratulate the user for ‘saving the company $X.00.’ The value would be calculated by the number of assets downloaded multiplied by a base number that represented the savings of using a managed asset (vs. re-scanning, or reshooting/retouching an image).

The idea was that users would be allowed to earn EXCITING GIFTS on a regular basis. One of my colleagues developed a prototype for the feature and it worked and looked great. However, it was soon realized that there really wasn’t a way to determine if users were actually using the assets for their jobs or if they were just downloading to win the Starbuck ‘s Card (or other token of achievement). Thus the idea was put in the freezer.

I want to make clear, that user incentives are important, but there are no better incentives than a solid implementation and helping your users to know how to use that system.

A recurring mantra among stakeholders at several clients, was “if you build it they will come,” thus lobbied for something of a minimalist approach to the DAM and  a lot can-kicking down the road (we can add workflow….later, we can integrate with our portal…..later).

I think this is true in the sense that yes, the users will come merely because the system has been built; however the key is to get the users to come back, and come back again (and to stop re-shooting, re-scanning…).

I think you do this in two primary ways. First, you have to have to build a good DAM (boy that was easy!). Doing that, is way beyond the scope of this blog, but it is important to start with some reference points. I believe I Peter Morrivile’s facets of user.experience honeycomb ; to be a great guideline  for just about any type of information system. Remember, this is a guy  who literally wrote the book (with Lou Rosenfeld ) on user experience.

Users are more likely to make repeat visits to your system if they find its contents to be:

  • Useful
  • Usable
  • Findable
  • Valuable
  • Credible
  • Desirable
  • Accessible

A second key (and oft-ignored) component of promoting better user experience is to build better users. Don’t skimp on training for content contributors, system administrators, or end users.

Train-the-trainer sessions are fine, but you should also provide ample reference material–in the form of ‘print’ reference and e-learning demonstrations of procedures. If users go through instructor-led training, but don’t actually use the system for three months, the value of the training session is highly diminished. Provide them with the means to review materials before, and after an instructor-led session.

E-learning demonstrations should be brief and targeted to specific tasks (such as “how to download and convert an image” or “how to add metadata to a record”) Be sure to provide convenient access to these materials. You don’t necessarily need these to be housed in a learning management system, but doing so can provide added utility of allowing managers to assign learning materials and to assess users’ mastery of specific topics.

Additionally, in your instructional plan, you need to ensure that users have access to conceptual knowledge in an addition to system-specific procedures.

  • Help the users understand re-use best practices. Cutting and pasting is not re-use (not a best practice anyway). Nor is saving a file to a local hard-drive and e-mailing it around the globe.
  • Don’t ignore the fact that many of your users are not going be familiar with concepts such as resolution, color space, file formats. Provide the users the means to gain this pre-requisite knowledge Provide the users with gentle indoctrination to such concepts.
  • As mentioned previously it is a good idea to expressed these materials multiple formats as well: instructor led sessions, screen-casts (using Captivate, Jing….), Word handouts….to accommodate various learning styles and time schedules.
  • Generate a glossary that contains key terms. If you use acronyms, define them; don’t assume that the user will figure them out.
  • And do not ignore the power of mentoring; consider pairing some of your most experienced/DAM-savvy users with those who approach your system with trepidation.

If you build it they will come. If they have a good user experience they will come back.

Posted in CM, DAM. ECM..., Digital Asset Management, Uncategorized | Tagged , | 17 Comments

If I Can’t Read Your Site, I Won’t Buy Your Stuff

Is your organization providing content in accessible formats? I’m going to go out on a limb and guess probably not. If you’re answer is yes, then it’s likely that you are required to be 508-compliant by a government agency

I’ve long held that the delivery of accessible content makes business sense. There are many statistics that show the purchasing power of users with disabilities and what an under-served market this is. Note the US’s Americans with disabilities site.

With that in mind, think of the time and energy expended trying to ensure that your site is compliant with Firefox, Safari, or various mobile devices. Doesn’t it make business sense to ensure that content is ”people-compliant”  as well?

As the population ages, users with disabilities will become more prevalent. It’s likely that current economic conditions will cause people to delay retirements, the work force in the coming years is to be a lot grayer than economists had ever anticipated (I imagine the fashion industry will contend that ”72 is the new 55″). Furthermore, people who were members of 18-to-34 demographic when e-commerce first got a foothold now roughly fall into the ”30-to-46″ demographic; I am at the older edge of that group.

Recently my eye doctor was kind enough to use the euphemism ”progressive lenses” in describing my new prescription, but there is no denying that I now wear bifocals. My vision is diminishing. The number of users with visual, auditory, mobility, and cognitive impairments will continue to grow as the population ages; businesses would do well to have a strategy to capture this market.

However, I think the impetus for change is more likely to come from legal decisions like this In summary Target lost a suit against the National Federation for the Blind was forced to pay $6 million and to adhere to federal accessibility guidelines.

It seems likely that organizations will suddenly find time and money to make content accessible rather than write a check for $6 million (plus legal costs and diminished reputation…. ).

Is this legal decision a tipping point for accessible content in the commercial space? If so, what solutions will be at the forefront of managing and delivering people-compliant content?

Posted in Accessibilibly/Universal Design for Learning, CM, DAM. ECM... | Tagged , | 15 Comments

Lasswellian Definition of Content Management

Let me begin with the parsimonious edition of this blog: Content management is defined as who gets what, when and how in an organization. Have a great week!

That’s really all you need to know to help you to move away from analysis paralysis and begin managing your content. The rest of this post is optional 😉

In the past few days, I’ve seen numerous Tweets and Linkedin updates, etc. pointing to definitions of enterprise content management, digital asset management, media asset management. learning management systems…. (also known as ECM, DAM, MAM, LMS respectively).

I know the authors mean well, but I think that another wave of overlapping and competing definitions, just further distracts from the real mission of putting content in front of appropriate eyes at appropriate times. We need fewer definitions not more.

Whatever manufacturers, integrators, bloggers, etc. might call their solutions (ECM, LMS…) they are all managing content. This is something I alluded to in a recent blog.

Any content management (….DAM, DM, ECM…) system shoud provide:

  • Security
  • Content Repurposing
  • Workflow
  • Fulfillment

Several years ago, I read a paper  by Frank Gilbane that contained some timeless comments about content management, most notably that content management is:

“….a relatively recent term that has emerged coincident with the web….”

and

“It would be nice to think that the industry realized we needed a useable term that didn’t discriminate between content types and chose “content” to fill the gap we described above. But of course that isn’t what happened. Instead there continues to be a slow evolution of what we understand content management to be.”

That still hasn’t happened, we are still very discriminatory against content types.

Content management is a great descriptive (robust , extensible, scaleable…) term. However, its usage is rooted in the description of the late 20th century tools (Vignette, Interwoven…) that helped to facilitate management of Web content. I don’t think that people really considered that products that were bearing the DAM (Cumulus, Telescope….) or DM (Documentum, Filenet…) labels had been managing content all along. As were the staff members at your downtown library.

That being said we can continue to argue about the acronyms. Or we can ask really smart person, I defer to the noted content management expert Harold Lasswell, who said that content management ( including DAM, ECM, DM…) “is who gets what, when, and how.”

OK that was a bit of a reality distortion. Lasswell was a political scholar, and he never said that; he was talking about…politics. The quote was ”Politics is who gets what, when and how in a society.”

Still, we can apply Lasswell’s adage to the area of content management:

Content Management is who gets what, when and how in an organization. All content management systems should help to facilitate the following:

Who Gets The content? (Security)

  • Content consumers — students, customers, employees…
  • Content contributors — artists, writers…
  • Content Approvers—editors, managers…

What Content Do They Get? (Content Creation and Repurposing Rules)

  • Word Documents
  • Web Pages
  • PDFs
  • MPEGs
  • Braille
  • Voice

When Do They Get The Content? (Workflow)

  • When they browse (content consumers)
  • When they’re working on it (content producers)
  • When its ready to be published (content approvers)

How Do They Get The Content? (Fulfillment)

  • Download to desktop
  • E-mail
  • FTP
  • iPhone

Get it?

We can continue bicker over definitions and parsing the three-letter acronyms, or we can defer to Dr. Lasswell. Stop mulling over acronyms and go solve your  organization’s (or your clients’ ) content problems.

Posted in CM, DAM. ECM..., Digital Asset Management | Tagged , , , , | 24 Comments

Rebirth of the Fist

During a late night at a Chicago advertising agency in 1994, I was discussing the economic concept known as the invisible hand with one of my coworkers.

In the course of our conversation, we began using the term “invisible fist.” I called dibs and eventually registered the domain.

Since then, I have used the domain for a variety of purposes, often mixing the personal with the professional. Starting today I will be maintaining two sites:

With regard to the latter site, I consider the branding a work in progress. I have taken a Louis Sullivan approach, in that form is to follow function. My site structure is complete and I have lots of blog-worthy content welled-up inside of me, so tonight the site is l

As Ernie Ford might say: I have one fist of iron; the other of steel.

Posted in Education, Education/Ed Tech, Invisible Fist | Comments Off on Rebirth of the Fist