More shared research notes for my upcoming KM presentration.
Lawyers absolutely will not cooperate with completing fields,
creating or complying with taxonomies, or creating other useful
The big question: are there ways to “route around” this
self-defeating behavior that make more sense the trying to change
behavior (which is probably impossible in most firms)?
How about throwing high-horsepower data mining tools at unstructured data?
“In beta trials now, Edmunds.com will be deploying a technology from
Attensity called PowerDrill that converts written language into
PowerDrill takes the unstructured data, namely sentences, and
diagrams the sentences placing each part of speech, such as noun
phrase, verb phrase, and prepositional phrase, into a separate field,
actor, action, and object which can then be used by a standard database
to discover relationships and trends.
Although text mining for content intelligence is covered by a number
of other companies such as ClearForest Tags, Inxight SmartDiscovery,
and IBM WebFountain products, Laura Ramos, vice president at Forrester
Research, called Attenisty's diagram capability unique. “
“In a test with Honda Odyssey, a highly anticipated 2005 car model,
information from drivers of previous model years was tabulated,
allowing Edmunds.com to show that the most needed improvements were in
road noise, transmission issues, and styling.
Edmunds.com was able to analyze trend information from conversations
on the forums, including shopping and dealer behavior, re-occurring
issues, and concerns which can also be used to predict future behavior.
Companies such as Edmunds.com as well as government agencies are
suddenly waking up to the richness of unstructured data, according to
one industry analyst.”
Recall John Gilmore's “The Internet treats censorship as damage and
routes around it.” Might it be that we can treat bad metadata creation
behaviors of lawyers as damage that we can (and perhaps should) route