6 Comments

  • Roy Roebuck

    August 7, 2006 at 6:00 pm

    I came across this article indirectly. I agree with its premise and have applied similar metadata management capabilities for quite a while. In the 1980’s I developed a methodology, metaschema, and supporting-technology specification for whole enterprise management. Over the years, I saw the terms “object modeling” and “metadata” come into form, and the technologies to support them. My approach to whole-enterprise management is at http://www.one-world-is.com/beam.

  • Dmitry Semenov

    November 23, 2004 at 12:04 am

    An excellent article, an interesting approach of building meta-models. I think it can be used in creating connection between several system within enterprise(company) such as CMS, CRM and other to provide better functionality & findability.

    Andy, Thank you for a good article.

    Best wishes,
    Dmitry Semenov
    web-Designer/Developer, Information Arhictect.

  • Andrew

    November 24, 2004 at 12:45 pm

    An article like this, which explores the sophisticated depths of professionally-designed metadata systems kind of begs the question: what about the really sloppy and dumb metadata systems that power content applications people really really love to use, like Flickr?

    I’d like to see someone explain using del.icio.us style tagging with “real” content like the corporate knowledge base. Why not let someone enter both “product launch” and “prduct lnch” as tags in the same system without penalty? List them next to each other and any human can understand them.

    Why do we assume that simple and dumb cannot work for our precious enterprise content?

  • Wendy

    November 26, 2004 at 8:24 am

    Thisi article articulates a potentially very profitable business area. As is mentioned, one of the big challenges is to get organizations to define the structure and content of their product or service lines. This fuzzy area, which exists in all organizations, is the source of miscommunication and inefficiency and there are many benefits to addressing it. From a mgmt consulting perspective, it is difficult to pin down executives for definitions–they are reluctant to commit to codifying their systems, which are often driven by personalities and instincts. But a knowledge-based system such as the one described here can provide a strong foundation from which to launch creative and innovative efforts. A good article and a very promising opportunity for market growth.

    Wendy Sydow
    Proposal Manager
    KEVRIC, an IMC Company

  • Ben Tremblay

    December 1, 2004 at 4:12 pm

    Good stuff … really good; haven’t been to B&A for a while and this reminded me of why it had been a regular favourite for so long.

    For the past few months I’ve been exploring a paradigm that trumps metadata. User experience in the whole … dialogical, doncha know?

    hfx_ben

  • mark schraad

    December 5, 2004 at 2:27 pm

    While not a new concept, the information is well articulated and implementation of such a system is rare.

    The authors list the advantages and constraints well. But the largest constraint towards the design, structuring and installation of such a knowledge warehouse is the transient nature of current the American corporate structure. Mergers and acquisitions throw a substantial roadblock in a very lengthy process.

    Not to be the naysayer but other issues complicate the matter as well.

    Changes in personnel and their rolls within the company provide a substantial challenge.

    And lastly, building in an innate and organic growth capability into the system often cripples both the functionality and its usability.

    All of that being said… kudos to Andy and his team for completing such a monumental project.

Sorry, comments are closed.