Written by Malcolm Ryder
Productive content is a major focus of eXie users.
Getting content and putting it away both get a lot of attention from users who need the content to support their ongoing work. Yet the full re-usability of the content is often frustrated by the inability to efficiently find it when needed. This probably reflects a need for the applied tools to be about the user first and about the content second.
Written by Malcolm Ryder
The difference between private and public is so easy for us to understand that when we hear “publicity” we already know whether we want it or not.
It’s a simple representation of how we feel — about choosing whether to expose things about ourselves or not.
Our sense of having very consistent feelings doesn’t change as we move from one environment to another, but our choice certainly differs depending on what is involved. We might think of “publicity” as being more or less widespread and somewhat unrestrained. Unless we try to control it, it may seem to be indifferent to who gets the exposure and access.
If we flip it around, however, the question is whether we want other people to ask us about ourselves or ask us to share something that we have.
The “feeling” that lies behind what they ask for can always be seen as having three elements: a level of interest, a privilege of access, and a degree of immediate intention.
That’s where we make a difference in a planned way. The more that we decide to satisfy their concerns by using our content, the more we are adopting a publishing role. In the entirety of our own collection of content, we have the option to aim distribution of the items in many ways. Some of our items have been produced specifically to be published, and others less so. But once we decide how someone else should be able to use any item in our collection, we can carry through as a publisher.
To some extent, everyone publishes their own content — to themselves. This just acknowledges that our own future use of something we saved beforehand will likely involve the same three elements of desire that any other requester has. Seeing things that way, the big question is, did we save things in a way that best serves the chance to publish?
Written by Malcolm Ryder
Having a collection of already-prepared content is better than not having one, as long as it can actually be used effectively “on demand”.
But what does “effectively” mean?
Wherever there is an audience for the ideas held in the content, that audience represents demand. Further, the style of the content’s presentation of ideas may be a matter of strong preferences. Together, the presentation and the particular ideas are criteria that an audience will use to decide whether content is well-suited for their purpose. This in turn makes easy access to that content the next most important issue.
What is worth noting, especially, is that a collection that does not provide easy access will frustrate demand for its good content and make the entire collection less “in demand”.
By analogy, making your best content available to users is like opening a new store or offering a place to stay to a guest. You have to organize your content so that users, especially new or infrequent ones, can quickly feel at home. You are the host, and you help your guest navigate the place to make it most comfortable and worthwhile.
We know from experience that the same content may be available in multiple places, but that users plan to look for things by first looking in their favorite place and, once there, then looking for the specific content.
We also know that in a digitized world, the “place” people so often prefer is a particular search engine. But is that really enough?
The answer, usually, is this: a search engine is most helpful when you don’t know or don’t care where the content resides.
That doesn’t mean that search is ineffective when the user already prefers a certain repository. But search does not improve the quality of your collection.
Instead, the more important aspect of organizing your content is to use a method that raises the quality of your collection by using the suitability of the content as the key to where it will go in the collection. The same method can improve the collection both retroactively and as additional content is collected. For most collections, a catalog is the answer. In fact, a single collection can have multiple different catalogs tailored for different kinds of users or situations. Showing the catalog supports or even increases the demand that users have for the collection.
