| |
 |
Thursday, July 04, 2002 |
Klogging 101: What, Why, and How.. Explaining klogging to the gang at the office? To your user group?
Here's a little slide show you can use.
Klogging 101: What, Why, and How.
Talking points for 15-20 minutes.
Not included, but may be useful: a demo session.
- Bring your favorite blogging tools (some of the slides mention UserLand products).
- Write to the web
- Open an edit page.
- Write a post.
- Publish it.
- See the results on the web.
- Comment on incoming news and data
- Look at the news aggregator.
- Comment on one.
- Publish your comment and see the results.
Suggestions?  <A title="Add Phil Wolff to your AIM Buddy List" href="aim:addbuddy?screenname=evanwolff">AIM Y! @Ryze [a klog apart]
10:55:50 PM 
|
|
Mindmapper for personal KM with collaborative elements.. thomas n. burg thinks mindmapping software, like mindmapper, might be an important part of the desktop toolkit. He likes their Swiss site best.
I've tried it and it feels like a natural, spatial counterpart to outlining. In addition to hierarchy, mindmaps show distance, the relationship among leaves on different branches, clearly. Part of the data visualization theme, but on a personal level. Seeing your own thoughts. Very kloglike.
Now if the nodes could be linked to blog posts... [a klog apart]
10:51:24 PM
|
|
Unstructured content. Martin Butler has written a brief and to-the-point article highlighting that 80% of the content in an organisation is "unstructured", [Column Two]
10:49:31 PM
|
|
Irresponsible development efforts part II. I finished testing this bad boy today. It's actually quite fun! Go to your portal page, it shows you the clients where you're partner in charge and it tells you how many times they've visited our external web site in the last 7 and 30 days. Tomorrow I'm going to work on the add in for the client lookup utility that will include these stats for any client you choose to lookup.... Fun!
And tomorrow is also the day we go firm wide with the portal! It's been released to 100 people in beta for about six weeks, so I don't expect we'll get any technical problems. Still - it's kind of fun to see the rubber hit the road. [How do you know that?]
10:49:09 PM
|
|
Portal for Developers and SMEs. An interesting idea from Liz Barnett, Giga Information Group (quoted in an interview in The Rational Edge): One of the things that I've been a proponent of is a concept I call the Developer's Resource Portal. That may not be the best name because it doesn't have to be a [E M E R G I C . o r g] [StickyString]
10:39:55 PM
|
|
Up periscope. Full stop. Fire torpedos!. John Hiler of WebCrimson, quoting a disinterested customer to a salesman of an expensive Content Management System (cms): "There are a couple things you described that I could use, but I can't justify that sort of outlay when blogware hits most of my specs." Puts the punch in the face of the enterprise class cms builders. (The article pointed to by "SiT" and a City University of Hong Kong site.) It reiterates my rant about non-profit educational folks wasting money building medium level cms's. "willR" is on to something with the notion of a k-12 targeted blog app. The problem is that only about 100 of us out there get it. And we ain't got the money to make it happen, though it would be a pittance compared to some of the amounts being spent on "educational protals." So for now, I think we WP types might be focused on Manila. [PatD News]
10:38:25 PM
|
|
Intranet stats. Martin White has just posted some interesting stats on intranet and extranet usage in the UK. A summary of organisations [Column Two]
10:37:40 PM
|
|
The benefits of CRM - Thoughts from Chris Smith
Among the benefits of CRM that Chris points out he mentions "Gather[ing] decentralized contact information into a single collaborative store that will survive the immenent departure of many of its contributors" [How do you know that?]
You would think that the natural tendency of a corporate organization (like BigLaw, or any other large law firm) would be to centralize. Especially information. I mean, what else do lawyers sell? Oh right, "time." But people don't pay you just to run a stop watch; they pay you for your expertise. For the information that you carry, and that you can access, and can relay.
When you see a large corporate organism not automatically trying to assimilate decentralized information then you know there is another force working here. For humans, there is the opposite of the life-force, which Freud called the "death-wish." In corporations, the opposite of the desire to centralize is the fear, or lack of understanding of the benefits of, technology.
[Ernie the Attorney]
10:36:14 PM
|
|
Lawyers less reliant on staff, sayeth Beckman & Hirsch
In their montly ABA column (In Re Technology), the authors make the point that lawyers are less reliant on staff than they once were. True enough. Many lawyers can type (aided by spell-check), and fax, and E-mail documents that have been scanned or which are in word processing format. "An entire office can fit in a laptop for work anywhere, anytime," they say. And they point out that this trend will lower the cost of legal services, and generate higher quality work.
I totally agree. But, will law firms aid the process? Some will, and many won't.
For example, the compensation model in most (if not all) larger firms doesn't account for cost savings based on independence from staff. You hear all the time about how "overhead per lawyer is [fill in a large six-figure number] every year." I used to accept that proposition when I was a young lawyer. Now, I ask if maybe the overhead isn't different for different lawyers. Some lawyers have big offices and require a lot of staff attention. Some lawyers are self-sufficient and make few demands on firm resources. In other words, some lawyers are efficient. But....is "efficiency" taken into account in compensation? Well now, that's a telling trail of breadcrumbs isn't it? [Ernie the Attorney]
3:07:14 PM
|
|
destinationKM.com: Five reasons people don't tell what they know.
Quote: " There are many reasons why people are reluctant to share what they know. They are busy and don't have time to share. They forget to share. They don't want the additional work and responsibility that goes with sharing. They are assigned to projects they feel are unworthy of their contribution (a derisive term for is WOMBAT--waste of money, brains and time). But, as common as these conditions may be, they were not the responses I found most often in my research.
Here are the top five reasons why people don't tell what they know" [Serious Instructional Technology]
2:56:33 PM
|
|
© Copyright 2002 Jim McGee.
|
|
