Do not disclose without prior consent from the Project Management Practice � Contact: pmp@altran.be � Version 1.5

Knowledge Management Solution LineFocus on Enterprise Search approach

2

What will the enterprise search imply?

Search is for action or production

• Poor or no result > no action, no production

• Bad result > Bad action, bad production

Search is THE access to information : simple & quick

• User centric tool : accessible, straightforward

• Reliable tool : permanent, durable

Search is THE window to the information repository

• All relevant sources must be accessible

• Incredible developer, marker of the quality of the information management

3

The risks

Why the users would stop using your search ?

Bad results (too much, poor, not relevant, obsolete)

= bad index

= poor index

= bad representation of the results

Interface not user-friendly

Response time

Not exhaustive

The lost users are extremely hard to get back !

4

The key success factors

Strong management of quality & quantity of information

Interface matching with expectations of all users

From Google like to Expert search

A search that is contextual to the company, the location and the business

A search that is versatile (synonymous, cleansing, navigation…)

Response time accepted and ensured

Functional upgradeability (favourites, related links, quotes …) & technical scalability

A quality roadmap (reporting & monitoring leading to actions)

5

The implementation of a search strategy

Analysis

What is the status of my information repository? Quality Audit, Sizing, volumes, Dispersion, Number of sources, Variation, evolution, Not “indexable” as is Content

What is the expectation, expressed or not, of my users ?

Architecture

What are the key functions ? What is the evolution path ? What is the search engine? What will be the interface tool(s)? What is the sizing ?

Phased implementation

A: Scalability

B: Function Evolution

Quality process

Usage Monitoring > Tuning of the search service + actions on information mgt

6

The different levels of the search service

Search criteria• Google like : full text

• Synonyms, business dictionaries

• Source filtering

• Metadata (classification, filters, facet's) > depend on the produced information

• Taxonomy, Ontology, …

Integration/accessibility

Results• list ordered by relevancy

• list with quick view

• contextual filters

• faceted navigation

These criteria will imply the complexity of the indexation customization

XX++XX++Full client (incl. local index)

XX---XX---Client

XXWEB

Shared mailsPersonal mailsEnterprise dataLocal data

7

Conclusion

Do not consider search as an isolated technical tool

Search MUST be user centric

Prefer a modular architecture (interface independent from engine)

Use of standards

Must be considered as a service (quality control, support, SLA …)

Don’t rush = reduce the risk of rejection at first use (difficult to recover)

Trap to avoid : the meta-search

� Loose relevancy, loose context differentiation > loose quality of results

� Loose index improvement > loose upgradeability

8

www.altran.com