Chapter 16. It’s all about the content
Your unified content strategy is only as good as your content. Successful content is:
• Well-written
• Appropriate for the customer and the context
• Customer-centric
• Clear, concise, and consistent
This chapter focuses on the aspects of content that are unique to a unified content strategy—structured collaborative content. We discuss why it’s a good idea to separate content from format and we describe the structured writing principles that allow authors to focus primarily on content. This chapter also introduces the concepts of collaborative authoring.
Writing structured content
Structure is the hierarchical order in which content occurs in an information product (for example, web page, brochure, or article) or component. Components have recognizable structures that are repeated each time the information type is created, for example, a value proposition is always structured in the same way. Structure frees you to think about the content, not how content should be organized and written because that’s already done for you—in templates and guidelines that authors have used for years.
Structure is everywhere in content. The more consistent the structure, the easier it is for users to read and use, and the easier it is for authors to write. Structured content can be automatically adapted to different needs and devices.
The importance of structuring content
By creating and using well-structured content, you create more opportunities for reuse across product lines, audiences, and information products. In a structured-authoring environment, when authors follow the same rules or guidelines for each element of content, the potential for reuse is greatly enhanced.
Many problems arise when content is not structured. Not only is unstructured authoring difficult for readers to follow, it’s also difficult for authors to create.
For details about the benefits of structured content, refer to Chapter 2, “Intelligent content.”
What is structured writing?
Structured writing is the way elements in a component are written.
• Structured writing is based on cognitive psychology.
Structured writing is based on how people read, process, and understand information. Within a structured writing environment, authors follow standards developed for different component types, ensuring content is always written consistently.
• Structured writing follows guidelines.
Information standards—after they are defined—provide consistency. The standard tells authors such things as a step must always contain the condition under which the step is performed, the action, and the result of the action, in that order. The structure can apply to individual steps, to the whole procedure, or to individual elements within a step.
• Structured writing applies at numerous levels, depending on your content models, for example:
• Sentence
• Paragraph
• Section
In a structured writing environment, standards apply at the level where you want consistency and reuse. The more granular your information, the more structure you will need, as well as more adherence to structure.
Principles of structured writing
Structured writing is governed by principles that describe how people process information.
• Chunking
At best, people can hold five to nine chunks of information in their short-term memory. Each chunk is an independent unit of information that can either stand on its own or contribute to a larger unit. Mobile devices display fewer chunks of information while desktops can display many more.
• Labeling
Chunks of information are labeled (titled) to identify the type of information they contain. To be effective, labels are substantive, indicative of the information they contain. Clear labels also make it much easier for users to scan for the correct information. Every chunk of information should have a substantive label.
• Relevance
Only information that relates to one main point is contained in a chunk, eliminating “nice to know” information.
• Consistency
For similar subject matter, use similar words, labels, formats, organizations, and sequences. Consistency, like relevancy, is critical for both reuse and usability. From a usability perspective, when information is presented consistently, customers form expectations about what it contains, which reduces their learning curve as well as their cognitive load.
• Reuse
The reuse principle dictates how a chunk of information can be reused in similar information products, so that wherever it is repeated, it’s the same. The reuse principle also ensures that when a chunk is updated, it is updated in all places it appears, ensuring ongoing consistency.
Structured authoring guidelines
Structured authoring is the process of authoring according to standards that dictate how content should be written. When implementing a unified content strategy, it’s critical that authors structure and author their content consistently.
The goals of structured authoring are to:
• Help authors create consistent content that can be reused transparently.
• Enhance the usability of content.
• Make all content appear unified whether it’s reused or not.
From the viewpoint of modeling, structure is the hierarchical order in which the information occurs in the information product. From the viewpoint of authoring, structure is the way content within each hierarchical element is written.
Let’s use the example of the recipes again (refer to Chapter 2, “Intelligent content”). The recipe guidelines might read something like this: The model for a recipe will specify which elements make up a recipe, which of those elements are mandatory and optional, and the order in which they appear. However, the model does not specify how each of those elements must be written. Even though the model will specify that recipes contain mandatory steps, authors may still write their steps differently. Some authors may include a result as part of their step, some may not. Some authors may describe an ingredient as “tomatoes, diced” while others might use “diced tomatoes.” This is where structured authoring comes in. In addition to the architecture (reflected in the models), authors need content development and style guidelines that will help them write content so it’s consistent, no matter where it’s used and who wrote it.
Structured authoring follows standards. When the structure of the content is defined (for example, the structure of a recipe), whoever writes a recipe must follow that structure. The standard tells authors such things as a step must always contain the condition under which the step is performed, followed by the action, followed by the result of the action. If all authors follow that standard, recipes will be clear and consistent. Ideally, that step can be reused wherever it’s needed and its reuse will not be jarring.
Structured authoring guidelines apply to every single element in a component model, whether content is planned for reuse or not. Structured authoring guidelines ensure consistency and readability as well as reusability.
Returning to our recipe example, Figure 16.1 identifies the authoring guidelines for our recipe.
Figure 16.1. Recipe structured authoring guidelines.
Applying the model
Depending on your need for control and precision in your unified content strategy, and also depending on the tools you’re using, you can provide explicit models that guide authors through the process of creating structured content using authoring templates, forms, and XML structures. Or you can provide written guidelines that authors follow manually (instead of being guided by a tool.)
Writing to a model is critical in adopting structured writing because the model contains the rules that govern not only what elements belong in which information product, but also how each element in a component is structured (based on the type of information it contains). When implementing structured writing, models serve three purposes:
1. To provide guidelines for authors—Authors use content models to determine what content goes in which information product, as well as how to structure each element. For example, by referring to the content model, they can determine that an information product requires a value proposition, they can determine the structure of a value proposition, and they can get hints/rules about how to write a value proposition. Refer to Chapter 2, “Intelligent content,” for this model.
2. To provide guidelines for information technologists—Information technologists (refer to Chapter 18, “Changing roles”) use models to build the templates or XML structures that authors must follow. Instead of referring to written guidelines, the tool guides authors through what to include and how to structure it. Some tools make it possible to include authoring guidance that provides the guidelines in the element. Even in a structured writing environment supported by tools, authors still need to understand the model to follow what the tool is asking them to do.
3. To provide guidelines for reviewers—Model reviewers check models to ensure that they support customer and information requirements. Editors use models to review authors’ drafts. They compare the draft against the content model to ensure that it contains all the necessary elements.
Models showing different channels
Figure 16.2 introduces a new model for a product description. This model shows the elements for a product description and how they are reused to accommodate different channels and information products.
Figure 16.2. Product description showing channel and information product.
In writing for this model, authors would know that a product description must contain a product name, a product description (divided into short, medium, and long components), and a graphic, in that order. Each element within the product description must be structured this way to accommodate its different uses. If this model is supported by an automated authoring tool, it would guide the authors through the product description, prohibiting entries that are not included in the model. If the model is not supported by an authoring tool, authors would refer to the model to understand how to put each element together.
Writing guidelines tell the author how to write to the model. It’s a good idea to include an example of each element, showing authors such things as how the long product description should be structured and written, based on the type of information it conveys.
For further information on models, refer to Chapter 12, “Content modeling: Adaptive content design.”
Using the building block approach
Another way of separating content from format is to use the building block approach. The building block approach allows you to identify core information that is applicable for all information products/users, and then build on it to customize information for different uses and users, as follows:
• Identify the core information (the information that is applicable for all uses).
• Identify what has to be added to the core to meet other needs, such as training, or different audiences.
• Tag additional elements according to where they belong.
For example, you might start with a product description that contains the elements in the model shown in Figure 16.2. The short description would become your core information and you would then add the medium and long descriptions to it to create a more comprehensive piece of information.
In the building block approach, each element is identified by the information product in which it belongs (for example, product sheet, eCatalog, or mobile), and supported by stylesheets that format it for the appropriate channel. In this way, authors create content elements, augmenting the core sequentially. The format is applied after the content is published—not as it is written.
Same content, different uses?
So, what about using a product description in a number of different places and publishing it to a number of different channels? Can the same content really be written so it’s appropriate for all its potential uses? Can a product description that is used in a brochure really be reused for mobile? Shouldn’t the brochure have a different tone?
We believe that content can be reused effectively, simply by following writing guidelines that are applicable to all the potential uses for the content. In addition, the building block approach allows content to be augmented as required, so the core is written in a style that is applicable for all uses and the augmented parts are written to successively build on the core.
The Product Desc Short is your core and appears in every information product. The Product Desc Medium is used in the product sheet, website, and eCatalog. The Product Desc Long is used only in the product sheet and the website.
The writing guidelines for each element are documented in the model (along with the structure guidelines) and are based on the type of information each component contains, as well as its potential uses and reuses. The difference is in how much information is provided and how it’s presented.
Writing guidelines for different uses
We’ve been developing content for both online and print media for more than 20 years, and experience has taught us that well-written online documentation makes good paper documentation and vice versa. The same is true of mobile. Mobile is short and succinct, as the first element of any component should be. Consequently, we’ve developed guidelines to ensure that content really can be used in a number of different ways. Many of these guidelines are simply guidelines for clear communication and make for better content, regardless of reuse. What is true for the Web is also true for mobile (see Table 16.1).
Table 16.1. Writing guidelines that apply to the Web and mobile.
However, if you look at these guidelines closely, you’ll find that they are just as valid for paper (see Table 16.2).
Table 16.2. Web and mobile writing guidelines applied to paper.
All guidelines help writers achieve consistency and reuse, especially when standards accompany each guideline.
So what’s different for mobile?
So if all these guidelines are the same regardless of whether it is print, Web, or mobile, how do we make this work? We know there’s no way that content designed for print will work on mobile. That’s because content written for print or the Web is often one monolithic chunk of content.
Go back to the model for the product description (in Figure 16.2) and look at how the description itself is structured. Look at the section on the building block approach. Take the concepts of the building block approach to heart and write your content to match these guidelines.
Write to models that clearly identify short and critical information. If you don’t have fine granular models, then write a topic sentence for every paragraph so the first sentence could be extracted automatically for mobile content. Ensure that the topic sentence clearly states the central idea that you’re expressing.
Example: Same content, different uses
The Reo Auto Company is preparing for the annual auto show and the launch of its new vehicles. This year they are launching their first hybrid sports utility vehicle (SUV)—the Tsai. They require a variety of information products: a press release to announce their new lineup, brochures to hand out at the show and dealer showrooms, updates to the website, a show catalog, and a mobile app. The content strategist and marketing group determine that the information products are to be provided through four channels: paper (show catalog, press release, brochure), the Web (website, press release), email (press release), and mobile. Mobile will be an app, not a mobile website. Each information product requires different content and design:
• A show catalog for the entire lineup (photo, short description, and key features, three cars to a page)
• A brochure for the Tsai only (photo, long description with all the features, and benefits)
• A press release for the Tsai only (no photo, short description, features and benefits)
• A website for entire lineup (home page for each car with photos, list of full features combined with a pricing calculator)
• A mobile app (page for each car with photo, list of features, and interactive experience for exploring the interior of the car)
Working with the model, the website team and marketing group proceed to develop the content, as shown in Table 16.3. (The metadata column indicates in which information product the content will appear.)
Table 16.3. Content development for Tsai product description.
The finished product
Once the content is written, it’s published to each information product and the format is applied based on the content’s use. Figures 16.4 and 16.5 show how the same product description is reused effectively in each medium.
Figure 16.3. Reuse across channels, Show Catalog.
Figure 16.4. Reuse across channels, Brochure.
Figure 16.5. Reuse across channels, Mobile App.
Figure 16.6. Reuse across channels, Press Release.
Figure 16.7. Reuse across channels, Web.
Collaborative authoring: Breaking down the silos
A key concept of a unified content strategy is the sharing of content and collaboration on its development. Collaboration ensures that the content components, such as product descriptions, are consistent and can be reused wherever they’re required: in a printed brochure, on the Web, on a mobile device. To ensure that content elements will meet all needs, everyone involved in creating content must work together to figure out exactly what their needs are and make decisions about how such elements are to be reused, structured, and written.
As we discuss in Chapter 1, “Content: The lifeblood of an organization,” content is often created by authors working in isolation from other authors. Silos are erected between departments and even within departments, which leads to content being created, recreated, and recreated again, which causes extra work and introduces inconsistencies. Individual authors working in isolation is not possible in a unified content environment. When content is compiled into its various information products, it must appear to be completely unified; there is no room for different “colors or textures.” The finished product must be seamless. The goal of collaborative authoring is to break down the silo walls so authors can create content consistently.
Collaboration, however, is harder than you might imagine. Collaboration, regardless of the tools in place to support it, is a human endeavor and must be supported by strong teams willing to undertake collaborative efforts. Collaboration requires everyone working together towards a common goal—unified content. To realize this goal, organizations will have to change the way content is authored, starting from the modeling process and continuing through each new project.
What is collaboration?
Collaboration is not a new concept. Think of the many books authored by more than one writer or the albums produced by more than one musician. The common element in successful collaborations is a goal that all players are aware of and support. Everyone involved in the collaboration knows what the goals are, knows his or her role, knows others’ roles, and knows how to address issues.
Players should also have a stake in the outcome, whether it’s content that’s easier to access and use, a more productive authoring environment, or even a share of company profits. With all those requirements, figuring out a way to make collaboration work in an organization, especially a large one, can be problematic. But, in a unified content strategy, it’s necessary.
More and more, effective information requires many people—often with varying skills and backgrounds and from different departments or even different professions—to work together on the same project, or more accurately, to work together on different aspects of the same project. Authors cannot work in isolation from subject matter experts and customers; marketing cannot work in isolation from product documentation and support; product developers and engineers cannot work in isolation from authors. This is certainly true in a unified content environment. Yet, collaboration in relation to writing is often misunderstood. Collaboration involves more than different authors creating content for different aspects of a project.
Exploring collaboration further
Doing a search for collaborative authoring or collaborative writing on the Internet turns up thousands of hits, most with one thing in common—the human element implicit in collaboration. For example:
• On the website for the University of North Carolina at Pembroke, a law professor posted guidelines for collaborative writing, with the number one guideline being:
“Take time at the start of your project to build cohesion. Begin your project by developing a shared understanding of your assignment and discussing basic procedural and logical issues. Build group cohesion and establish good interpersonal relations among members.”1
• In a thesis on computer-supported collaborative writing, the author defines collaborative writing as follows:
“In a true co-authoring process, the peers collaborate on every task as opposed to the situation in co-publishing [and] co-responding ... In co-publishing the individuals produce a collaborative text based on individual texts. Interaction in a co-responding environment takes place only during the revision process ... In peer collaboration, the group assignment is a truely [sic] joint task, all members contribute to the interaction most of the time and each of the peers has equal control over the text as well as within the interaction.”2
• In the OII Guide to Workflow Management and Collaborative Authoring, collaborative authoring is defined as follows:
Collaborative authoring can be defined as “the use of workflow techniques to manage the creation of integrated data sets by more than one author.” However, collaborative authoring is normally seen to include more than simply the application of workflow. It also requires facilities for defining how data created by different, parallel processes is to be combined or linked.3
For an effective collaborative authoring environment to be set up, the team must define how information is to be written, linked, and unified. The tools then support what the team decides.
• In another paper on collaborative authoring of web content, the authors state:
“Information content publishing may also be performed collaboratively, where multiple geographically dispersed authors contribute to the publishing of semantically related pieces of information...The authors bring together expert knowledge needed to provide parts of the content. Collaboration enables the authors to work together on the authoring tasks by sharing the knowledge needed in the process of producing content.”4
What does collaborative authoring require?
From an organizational perspective, collaborative authoring requires that all authors have an understanding of how content is used in multiple situations and the ability to work together to create it. This normally requires organizational change, specifically in the way content is authored. Authors must be involved in development teams (so they can plan for reuse from the beginning), they must have solid content models (that they have helped to create and been trained to follow), they must have usable authoring tools that assist them in following models and sharing information, they must have a stake in the outcome, and most of all, they need an understanding of what they are trying to accomplish and the support and resources to do it.
Collaborative authoring also requires technology’s assistance with some things, such as access to shared information, workflow routing, version management, and check-in and check-out, as well as tools to assist authors in writing to models. While tools are important, they play a supporting role; the focus of this section is on the organizational strategies for collaboration. Further information on tools and technologies as they relate to collaboration can be found in Chapter 20, “The role of content management.”
Strategies for organizational change
Many companies are not structured to support collaboration. Their structure is hierarchical and, as a result, many of their projects come together horizontally and in isolation. When a company introduces a new product or service, many of the people involved in the project don’t even know who the other people are or what aspect of the project they’re working on.
Once you’ve developed content models—especially if you’ve developed them by looking beyond the content that your group creates—you’ll be more aware of the content that other groups create. Yet the content models themselves are a collaborative effort, and they will need collaborative revisiting at the start of new projects to ensure they still accommodate the information needs of the new project, for example, is the granularity still sufficient to deliver content dynamically over the Web? For collaboration to occur, change must occur at many levels:
• In the way groups are organized and managed
• In the way groups work together
• In the way individual authors work
• In the way models are implemented and used
In the way groups are organized and managed
For authoring to be collaborative, project members must know and understand each others’ roles, even if they perform different functions. The content model will indicate what information products are required. Based on your knowledge of who does what in your organization, you can organize your team around the information products being developed. For example, if you are creating documentation for medical devices, the authoring team will consist of everyone involved in creating any type of documentation (brochures, doctors’ manuals, patients’ guides, or press releases) for the medical device—medical writers, marketing writers, and public relations specialists.
A unified content strategy requires that all groups collaborate on their efforts so they can complement one another. As groups become more familiar with one another, they can also work together to make sure models continue to meet their needs.
When you’re documenting a new product or service, hold a project kickoff meeting at the project’s inception (you can do this virtually if you’re geographically dispersed). Discuss the information requirements, ensure that the current content models support them, and establish how you will share information that is reusable. Make sure the writing standards for elements are explicit and understood by everyone in the group.
When you’re working on updates to existing content, revisit the content model to make sure everyone on the team understands what information is being reused and what the writing standards are for the elements being revised. Don’t assume that your group is the only group involved in an update; check the elements requiring revision against the content model to see who else is involved. As a group, you can make sure the model is still effective as elements are updated; you can also keep it current with what you’ve learned from users, so you continue to deliver what readers really need, not just what the models say they needed five iterations ago.
Organizing based on content requirements
Collaboration also implies a change in the way work is organized. In many organizations, individual groups handle a number of projects, separate from one another. A marketing group, for example, will often work on a number of different projects for a variety of other groups in the organization. Those projects are, for the most part, independent of one another in how they’re staffed, funded, and managed. It’s difficult for groups to collaborate with an independent, project-oriented organizational structure in place.
In a unified content environment, organizations need to be resource-based, focusing on content requirements across the organization, not just for one project. When planning the information products required for a project, departments should think about what they will add to and use from the definitive source. As they develop their content, they should plan for its other uses as well. Consider allocating budgets for content development across an organization, not to individual departments. This allows you to move to a resource-based content development model instead of a project-based one.
Resource-based project planning also reduces time and costs for content creation. When content is tagged and stored for easy retrieval, authors can retrieve it and either incorporate it into their information product as is or modify it for their purposes (based on their content model). The model will tell the marketing group that technical publications also needs the product description and that it must be written and structured in a certain way so that it’s usable for both purposes. To reach this common understanding of the product description, technical publications and marketing must collaborate.
In the way groups work together
Even in a collaborative environment, authors don’t have to work together in groups the whole time. They can do plenty of work on their own. But, crucial decisions must be made together and reaching consensus is key to successful collaboration. One author may find that the current level of granularity is insufficient, but before changing it, everyone who is affected by the change must agree. Collaborative teams, when they work, do not proceed by democratic vote. Instead, they struggle to reach consensus, even though it takes longer than voting. Consensus means that everyone agrees to a change, not just the 7 out of 10 who vote for it. With consensus, everyone buys into the change and will support it in their writing.
Furthermore, collaboration is significantly different from cooperation. When we cooperate, we work together, but we each produce and “own” our own project. We retain our separate styles and in the finished product, we can usually tell which portions are “ours,” and we can certainly tell which complete information products we created. This kind of independence doesn’t work in a unified content environment, when information products are compiled from a number of different elements, often written by a number of different authors.
Relinquishing ownership
In a unified content environment, the concept of ownership becomes irrelevant. For instance, in an “independent but cooperative” environment, my colleague writes a procedure, which I edit. I write another procedure, which my colleague edits. But, ultimately, my colleague is in charge of his, and I’m in charge of mine. We negotiate changes and we (often delicately) suggest improvements. But we “live with” what the other person produces. We do not really merge our thoughts so that it becomes transparent who wrote what. However, if a particular author’s style is discernible, the content may not be reusable in different information products. Independence often leaves documentation uneven, which is unacceptable in a unified content environment.
Instead of the usual, cooperative approach to writing that many groups use, a unified content strategy requires true collaboration, which means working together so thoroughly that you no longer own any part, any section, any sentence, or any content assembly. Components are truly unified, based on the content model, and authors can’t tell who did what. This is difficult for many authors to get used to; they claim it takes away their creativity. We frequently dispute this belief, emphasizing that the real creativity comes in analyzing customers’ needs and figuring out the best way to meet those needs, often dynamically. The creativity also lies in building strong models, based on possible uses and potential users for content. In this way, authors truly become content strategists, with more and more emphasis on the analysis and design that drive the content. Collaboration is critical in creating and sharing the information design and the standards that everyone follows.
In the way individual authors work
Collaboration requires that authors not only work with other authors in their own department, but also with authors from different departments. In a collaborative environment, authors work together to ensure that content is not written more than once by more than one author, and more importantly, that similar content is not written about differently. The content models must be clear about what the information requirements are; the organizational structure must be clear about which department authors which elements.
Developing new skills
What does this mean in the workplace? It means that authors may need new skills to help them analyze content and design. They’ll also need skills for modeling, structured writing, and conflict management to help them in the transition from independent to collaborative work. Strategies for helping authors switch to a collaborative authoring environment include:
• Training authors in analysis, content modeling, and design; emphasize analysis of information and users’ needs so authors learn to model based on needs.
• Involving authors from across the organization to develop models and review them on an ongoing basis.
• Training authors in how to follow and use models.
• Training authors in structured writing.
Also, often overlooked in favor of the more “technical” skills of analysis, design, and writing is the ability to handle conflict. A certain amount of conflict is needed to motivate change and encourage creativity. However, unmanaged conflict can quickly turn to chaos. Conflict will certainly be present as groups try to reach consensus, and it’s important for team members to understand conflict responses and how to deal with them. Furthermore, in collaborative efforts across departments and even within departments, there are likely to be turf wars. Departments or individual authors may feel they are being compromised and when this happens, conflict is imminent. Jean Richardson and Lisa Burk’s paper Conflict Management in Software Development Environments provides a good description of conflict management techniques, as well as a thorough bibliography.5
In the way models are implemented and used
Models are the key to a successful unified content strategy. While not everyone in your organization can get involved in the modeling process, you should have representatives from every area that creates content. Their input is critical in defining information requirements and potential reuse. Once models are developed to accommodate needs across the organization, anyone involved in authoring content must learn how to follow them. We recommend the following:
• Run workshops introducing the concept of models and how to use them for authors and for reviewers of content and for managers of content creation groups. Stress how important models are for unified content and stress how important it is that different groups contribute to and follow the models.
• Test new authoring tools and authoring scenarios for usability with all the groups that will be using them. Provide real authoring scenarios to each group, including such things as their ability to:
• Follow the model (whether it’s supported by a tool or referenced in a writing guide or spreadsheet)
• Identify and retrieve reusable information
• Populate a document with reusable information
• Create components
• Publish components
• Store components
Strategies for technological change
Although tools are not the way to implement collaborative authoring (change must occur at the organizational level), their role is a critical supporting one. They don’t replace the teamwork, understanding, or cohesion that collaborative authoring requires. In fact, tools can make collaboration easier, but they do not guarantee success. In working with a tool that is not conducive to the creative process, authors often feel like they’re submitting rather than creating.
The tools required for collaboration involve more than giving everyone access to the same directories on the same file server, regardless of how user-friendly the file server may be! Some elements critical for effective collaboration are:
• Access to shared information
• Check-in and check-out
• Access and version control
• Transparent authoring to support models
• Managed workflow
• Event notification
Summary
Structure is everywhere in content. The more consistent the structure, the easier it is for users to read/use and the easier it is for authors to write. Structured content can be automatically adapted to different needs and devices. Structured writing is the way elements in a component are written.
To structure information effectively, you need to separate content from format, which means:
• Defining writing standards that focus on meaning rather than format
• Thinking about what you want the information to do rather than what you want the information to look like
• Creating a writing environment that enables authors to structure their content consistently by either supporting them with tools or providing comprehensive models to follow
• Following writing guidelines to ensure that content is written effectively for all channels and all uses
Collaborative authoring is key to breaking down silo walls. Collaboration means everyone working together to achieve the common goal of unified content that is truly seamless. Collaboration sounds easier than it is, though. To ensure successful collaboration it is necessary to:
• Know everyone involved in creating content and what their roles are; look to models to provide advice about information requirements; consider including “responsible party” for each information type in your model so you know what information is required as well as who is responsible for creating it. Hold kickoff meetings at the beginning of projects.
• Think about how your organization is structured. Does your structure allow for collaboration across departments? How do departments know what other departments are working on?
• Provide authors with a stake in the outcome and an understanding of how collaborative authoring will benefit them.
• Consider moving to a resource-focused approach to developing content; develop budgets based on content requirements across the organization instead of department-specific budgets.
• Encourage authors to relinquish ownership of their content; content with a discernible style is not necessarily reusable.