3 ms·

I like these kinds of systems. I do feel like in generally they require so much buy in from everyone, maintaining these pages has to be a constant priority. Thi

I like these kinds of systems. I do feel like in generally they require so much buy in from everyone, maintaining these pages has to be a constant priority. This becomes a problem if multiple people leave at once or someone is very busy when expiration comes up and rubber stamps the renewal with outdated information... But it's definitely better than no system at all!

maccard 5y ago
> do feel like in generally they require so much buy in from everyone, maintaining these pages has to be a constant priority. This is true of any system of knowledge sharing, even if it's in-person-watercooler chat. The hard part is getting people to do it, no matter what the system is. > This becomes a problem if multiple people leave at once or someone is very busy when expiration comes up and rubber stamps the renewal with outdated information... The only solve for multiple people leaving at once is to ensure that you have all of their knowledge documented ahead of time, and if you have that, you don't need anything like this. A tool or a process can't solve people problems. For outdated information, this is no worse than the confluence abyss that I've experienced in previous jobs.
Mezzie 5y ago
A proper transition to those systems includes talking to each team that will be using it, breaking down all their workflows, and making sure that said system works with practices in place (a new system that causes everything to take 20% more time is not okay). It also includes maintenance plans; every bit of information planning I do also includes 'this is how you maintain this system/this is the parts that will require effort to maintain/this is what will happen if you decide not to do any maintenance whatsoever, which I do not recommend'. Documentation management and information architecture planning is work, and properly planned your maintenance will be minimal (NOT non-existent, but minimal) because the system will be designed to be as frictionless as possible. But nobody wants to either pay for that or accept the time it takes.

maccard 5y ago

> do feel like in generally they require so much buy in from everyone, maintaining these pages has to be a constant priority. This is true of any system of knowledge sharing, even if it's in-person-watercooler chat. The hard part is getting people to do it, no matter what the system is. > This becomes a problem if multiple people leave at once or someone is very busy when expiration comes up and rubber stamps the renewal with outdated information... The only solve for multiple people leaving at once is to ensure that you have all of their knowledge documented ahead of time, and if you have that, you don't need anything like this. A tool or a process can't solve people problems. For outdated information, this is no worse than the confluence abyss that I've experienced in previous jobs.

Mezzie 5y ago

A proper transition to those systems includes talking to each team that will be using it, breaking down all their workflows, and making sure that said system works with practices in place (a new system that causes everything to take 20% more time is not okay). It also includes maintenance plans; every bit of information planning I do also includes 'this is how you maintain this system/this is the parts that will require effort to maintain/this is what will happen if you decide not to do any maintenance whatsoever, which I do not recommend'. Documentation management and information architecture planning is work, and properly planned your maintenance will be minimal (NOT non-existent, but minimal) because the system will be designed to be as frictionless as possible. But nobody wants to either pay for that or accept the time it takes.