Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
A few preliminary results form the Enterprise Search and Findability Survey. The dataset for the survey is very large, and the analysis on the complete dataset will be in the report that will be published in June. This presentation is a mash-up of the versions presented at the Enterprise Search Summit, 15th of May, 2012, in New York, US, Enterprise Search Europe in London, 30th of May 2012, IKS Semantic Enterprise Technologies Workshop on the 12th of June in Salzburg, Austria. Also presented at Findability Day 2012 Stockholm,
Citation preview
RESULTS FROM THE ENTERPRISE SEARCH AND FINDABILITY SURVEY
SLIDESHARE.NET/FINDWISE
GLOBAL + EUROPE
+ NORTH AMERICA
ANNUAL SURVEY
170 RESPONDENTSGLOBALLY
SEARCH VENDORS AND INTEGRATORS
EXCLUDED
EUROPE >1000 EMPLOYEES
107 ORGS.
EUROPE:59.4%
101 RESPONDENTS
NORTH AMERICA:22.3%
38 RESPONDENTS
DEMOGRAPHICS
28 COUNTRIES
52.2%PRIVATE SECTOR
48.8%PUBLIC SECTOR
60.8%> 1000 EMPLOYEES
33.5%> 10 000 EMPLOYEES
52.9%GLOBAL
NORTH AMERICA:71.1% GLOBAL ORGS
EUROPE53.6% GLOBAL ORGS
78.7%ONE CORPORATE
LANGUAGE
AMOUNT OF INDEXED UNSTRUCTURED
INFORMATION IN 3 YEARS
EUROPE86.2%
SAYS MORE
HOW CRITICAL IS FINDING THE RIGHT INFORMATION TO BUSINESS GOALS AND
SUCCESS?
75.0%IMPERATIVE/SIGNIFICANT
EUROPE76.5%
IMPERATIVE/SIGNIFICANT
IS IT EASY TO FIND THE RIGHT INFORMATION
WITHIN YOUR ORGANISATION TODAY?
59.5%MODERATELY/
VERY HARD
EUROPE77%
MODERATELY/VERY HARD
14.0%FAIRLY/VERY EASY
MULTIPLE REPOSITORIES?
50.7%MULTIPLE REPOS
EUROPE53.3%
MULTIPLE REPOS
NORTH AMERICA:63.6%
MULTIPLE REPOS
LARGER ORGS THINK IT IS (WAY)
MORE IMPORTANT
WHAT ARE THE OBSTACLES TO FINDING THE RIGHT
INFORMATION?
63.4% POOR SEARCH FUNCTIONALITY
50.0% LACK OF ADEQUATE TAGS
51.4% INCONSISTENCY IN HOW WE TAG
CONTENT
52.1% DON'T KNOW WHERE TO LOOK
EUROPE
64.2% POOR SEARCH FUNCTIONALITY
47.7% LACK OF ADEQUATE TAGS
48.6% INCONSISTENCY IN HOW WE TAG
CONTENT
47.7% DON'T KNOW WHERE TO LOOK
NORTH AMERICA:
48.6% POOR SEARCH FUNCTIONALITY
62.9% LACK OF ADEQUATE TAGS
65.7% INCONSISTENCY IN HOW WE TAG
CONTENT
54.3% DON'T KNOW WHERE TO LOOK
LEVEL OF SATISFACTION
19.6%MOSTLY/VERY
SATISFIED
EUROPE18.5%
MOSTLY/VERY SATISFIED
SATISFIED WITHUI SPEED
NAVIGATION
DISSATISFIED WITHMETADATATAXONOMY
PRIMARY GOAL FOR UTILISING SEARCH
TECHNOLOGY
ACCELERATE RETRIEVAL OF KNOWN INFORMATION
SOURCES
86.6%IMPERATIVE/SIGNIFICANT
IMPROVE RE-USE OF CONTENT
(INFORMATION/ KNOWLEDGE)
70.6%IMPERATIVE/SIGNIFICANT
RAISE AWARENESS OF “WHAT WE KNOW”
58.2%IMPERATIVE/SIGNIFICANT
USER EXPERIENCE TESTS
18.1%REGULARLY
EUROPE14.5%
REGULARLY
SEARCH SUPPORT?
YES37.5%
EUROPE + GLOBALYES
45.9%
WHO OWNS SEARCH?
57.6%IT
43.2%IT (NOT CIO)
NORTH AMERICA:78.8%
IT
EUROPE:54.2%
IT
NORTH AMERICA:51.5%
IT (NOT CIO)
28.8%CORPORATE
COMMUNICATIONS
EUROPE43.9%
CORPORATE COMMUNICATIONS
17.6%KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT
EUROPE10.5%
KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT
FINAL DECISION REGARDING SEARCH
70.9%IT
NORTH AMERICA:87.9%
IT
EUROPE:66%
IT
SEARCH BUDGET
NONE SAYS45.4%
EUROPENONE SAYS
36.4%
DON’T KNOW 15.1%
EUROPEDON’T KNOW
21.8%
FOR THOSE WITH A SEARCH BUDGET
76.6%LESS THAN 100K €
EUROPE≈50%
DON’T KNOW HOW MUCH
BUDGET IN 3 YEARS
15.1%SAYS SMALLER
BUDGET
SAME OR MORESAYS THE REST
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES WORKING WITH SEARCH
50.4%LESS THAN ONE
EUROPESAME IN >10 000EMPLOYEE ORGS
EUROPE >10 00042.3%
HAVE MORE >1
EUROPE >10 00019.2%
3 - 5 PPL
ROI OR TCO
62.1%NO
KPI
58.6%NO
EUROPE >10 00042.3%
NO
WHAT KIND OF KPI:S?
MONTHLY USAGE STATS
USER SATISFACTION
% TOP SEARCH TERMS MANAGED
CALL CENTER CALLS DEFLECTED
SEARCH REPHRASING
PRODUCTIVITY GAIN
SEARCH PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
WEB SEARCH INFLUENCE
YES59.5%
SIGNIFICANT/IMPERATIVE
EUROPEYES
67.2%SIGNIFICANT/IMPERATIVE
SAME TECH ON INTRANET AND INTERNET?
YES30.4%
EUROPEYES
42.6%
SEARCH STRATEGY IN PLACE?
YES14.2%
EUROPEYES
6.0%
YES + PLANNED44.4%
EUROPEYES + PLANNED
46%
USERS CAN PROVIDE FEEDBACK
YES + PLANNED72.3%
EUROPEYES + PLANNED
80%
USERS INFLUENCE ON RELEVANCY
YES11.4%
EUROPEYES16%
PLANNING20.0%
IS THERE AN OWNER OF INFORMATION?
YES29.5%
CONTENT LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT PROCESS IN
PLACE?
NO52.9%
STANDARD FOR WHAT METADATA (DESCRIBING
CONTENT/INFORMATION)
YES + PLANNED48.4%
HAS A TAXONOMY (IDENTIFYING, NAMING AND
CLASSIFYING CONTENT)
YES32.4%
WHO CAN TAG/CLASSIFY CONTENT WITH METADATA?
All users
User that publish content
IT
Records managers
Authors
Subject matter experts
Automated (by software)
0 13 25 38 50
%
SUMMARY(HYPOTHESIS)
NO BUDGETNO RESOURCESNO STRATEGY
NO TCONO ROINO KPI
BUSINESS CASE?IT DECIDES
BETTER METADATA MORE TAGGING
TAXONOMY
SOMETHINGPOSITIVE
INFORMATION = VALUE
INFONOMICS:
THE PRACTICE OF INFORMATION ECONOMICS
@DOUG_LANEY - GARTNER
IN FORBES.COM 22TH MAY 2012
ENHANCE VALUE OF EXISTING
INFORMATION
WE CAN FIX THIS
BETTER METADATA
STRATEGYSTANDARDISED KPI
(SEARCH PERFOMANCE INDICATOR)
ROI
WORK STARTS AFTER
IMPLEMENTATION
LET US ALL HELP TO MAKE FINDABILITY
BETTER
QUESTIONS?
@kristiannorling
@findwise
findwise.com
Slideshare
Vimeo
Newsroom
Kristian Norling
