1 / 32

Making the Business Case for Metadata:

Making the Business Case for Metadata:. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Case Study Joseph A Busch, Principal. Who I am: Joseph Busch. Over 25 years in the business of organized information. Founder, Taxonomy Strategies LLC Director, Solutions Architecture, Interwoven

mtieman
Télécharger la présentation

Making the Business Case for Metadata:

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Making the Business Case for Metadata: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Case Study Joseph A Busch, Principal

  2. Who I am: Joseph Busch • Over 25 years in the business of organized information. • Founder, Taxonomy Strategies LLC • Director, Solutions Architecture, Interwoven • VP, Infoware, Metacode Technologies • (acquired by Interwoven, November 2000) • Program Manager, Getty Foundation • Manager, Pricewaterhouse • Metadata and taxonomies community leadership. • President, American Society for Information Science & Technology • Director, Dublin Core Metadata Initiative • Adviser, National Research Council Computer Science and Telecommunications Board • Reviewer, National Science Foundation Division of Information and Intelligent Systems • Founder, Networked Knowledge Organization Systems/Services

  3. Recent & current projects

  4. Agenda • Metadata themes & issues • Metadata costs & benefits

  5. Overall enterprise metadata goals • Provide a single methodology for categorizing information across EPA offices, programs, and regions. • Reduce the time it takes to successfully target and find cross-Program/Region information • Enable and enforce content linking across the agency • Build common agency-wide terminology resources • Eliminate multiple, ambiguous taxonomies • Eliminate multiple glossaries, abbreviations and acronyms • Group things differently depending on the context • e.g., ground water with drinking water, or ground water with water quality • Get the right content to the right people in the right format at the right time.

  6. Epa.gov site search • Put almost everything in the search index (PDF libraries, EIMS and other repositories, etc.) • Search across Programs & Regions on broad reaching topics. • Enable automatic synonym search (query expansion) • Avoid retrieving too much stuff. • Provide guidance about how to choose the best keywords. • Provide a single EPA-wide glossary, abbreviations and acronyms resource. • Find related information on-the-fly (more like this) • Identify major new resources (new topics, new major sites, documents of interest, what’s important today)

  7. Link information to & from Programs • Enforce linking to major national information. • Identify & recommend related content when pages are submitted to CMS (content management system). • Provide reliable & efficient process to efficiently assemble super topic sites, e.g., on mercury. • Define process to assemble topical sites quickly, e.g., in response to Hurricane Katrina. • Relate things to a certain application that supports a service being provided to certain end users. • Scope linking beyond EPA including GPO, Dept of Energy, & some commercial sites. * GPO – Government Printing Office

  8. Issues in using information from other Programs • Can’t reliably search information from other programs. • Terminology often means different things in different contexts, e.g., “risk assessment.” • Information from other programs may be contradictory, e.g., research information may conflict with regulations. • Links send people to another site. • Different look & feel. • Links are not necessarily reciprocal.

  9. Metadata • Require metadata. • Make it easy to add & change metadata. • Incorporate metadata into content workflow. • Pre-populate metadata. • Provide incentives for quality user-contributed metadata • Provide almost instantaneous feedback using that metadata. • Make it easy to change website organization without having to re-index or re-code pages.

  10. Agenda • Metadata themes & issues • Metadata costs & benefits

  11. Success measures: Usage metrics • Reduce FOIA requests/costs. • Expand use to include different types of people (new audiences) • Improve customer satisfaction survey results • Score higher on American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) government-wide survey • Improve OMB Performance and Accountability Reports (PARS) • Show cause and effect especially between regulation & measured outcome, e.g, arsenic removed from water and health. • Provide more visibility for research pages. • Reduce cost per unique user (UU) • Increase Web statistics (page hits) • Increase number of successful website searches. • Others? * FOIA – Freedom of Information Act. ** OMB – Office of Management & Budget.

  12. Success measures: IA Metrics • Increased number of links. • Increased number of internal cross-cutting links. • Reduced time to build super topic website. • Increased number of metadata fields filled-in. • Others?

  13. Potential benefit * FOIA – Freedom of Information Act.

  14. Potential benefit

  15. Potential benefit * Summary of EPA 2006 Budget.

  16. Potential benefit

  17. Potential benefit * ACSI – American Customer Satisfaction Index.

  18. Potential benefit * OMB – Office of Management & Budget.

  19. Potential benefit

  20. Potential benefit

  21. Potential benefit

  22. Potential benefit

  23. Potential benefit

  24. Potential benefit

  25. Potential benefit

  26. Other potential beneits?

  27. Estimated tagging costs * Assumption: All values are automatically populated using business rules, clues, or training sets. So the time per value is editorial quality checking, not indexing from scratch.

  28. Cost assumptions * Assumption: Includes one-time Documentum, Northern Lights, and other SW license costs

  29. Total cost of ownership (TCO)

  30. Benefits

  31. ROI Calculations

  32. For more information about the EPA Taxonomy Project please see: http://taxonomy.jkshirey.us/doku.php Logon: EPA-Taxonomy Passcode: taxonomy Questions? Joseph A. Busch415-377-7912, jbusch@taxonomystrategies.com

More Related