stc summit 2013: dita collaboration - paul wlodarczyk - easydita 2013-05-07

Paul WlodarczykJorsek LLC – Makers of easyDITAMay 7, 2013

Collaborating in DITA

Lessons Learned from the State of Collaboration Survey

Today’s Agenda

• State of Collaboration Survey 2012– What did we discover?– What are the implications for DITA collaboration?

• Collaborating in DITA– What’s required?– What technologies are here to help?


SURVEY OBJECTIVESThe State of Collaboration 2012


About the State of Collaboration survey

• Survey Objective:– Benchmark the current state of collaboration practices – Content contribution, review, approval– Reader-generated content and social content features– Understand common challenges and unmet needs

• Targeted at information development organizations– Info development managers and technical communicators– Other stakeholders in the collaboration process– Consultants and vendors

• Began collecting responses July 6, 2012• 123 respondents, 78 complete responses as of 9/20/2012 • Survey remained open through 12/31/2012• Updated annually to spot trends and discuss emerging issues


SURVEY DEMOGRAPHICSThe State of Collaboration 2012


Participating Industries (n=102)

Multiple responses allowed so amounts total more than 100%


The vast majority of respondents were in High Tech sectors.

Participating Individuals (n=102)


The vast majority of respondents were Technical Communicators or their Managers.

Number of Publications (n=74)

1-10

11-25

26-50

51-100

101-200

201-500

501-1000

>1000

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

30%

9%

19%

5%

5%

14%

7%

11%

Number of publications your organization creates annually


58% of respondents release fewer than 50 publications annually

Deliverables (n=80)



The scope of documents in the survey was beyond classic technical publications – includes marketing, sales, requirements, QA

Output Formats (n=80)



40% of companies still print, but electronic formats for mobile are growing in importance.

Source Content Management (n=80)


CMSes help with collaboration, but only a third use them.

Localization (n=77)

Number of Languages you publish

1

2-5

6-10

>10

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

58%

24%

5%

13%


Localization introduces unique needs for collaboration that we’ll examine in this year’s survey.

Number of Authors (n=76)

1-5

6-10

11-20

21-50

51-100

101-200

>200

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

49%

11%

9%

16%

4%

11%

1%

How many authors are in your organization?


49% have 1-5 authors 20% have 6-20 authors20% have 21-100 authors11% have >100 authors

Ratio of Reviewers to Authors

<1

1

1-5

5

5-10

10

>10

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

23%

14%

26%

9%

11%

8%

11%

Analysis: (Number of Reviewers) / (Number of Authors)

More than 10:1

Fewer than 1:1

Exactly 5:1

Exactly 10:1

Exactly 1:1


In 30%, more than 5:1, highlighting that collaboration is far-flung.In 49%, there are 1-5 reviewers per author. In 23%, review is concentrated into a group of fewer SMEs than authors.

AUTHORINGThe State of Collaboration 2012


Structured vs. Unstructured Authoring (n=91)


73.6% are using structured authoring

Unstructured Authoring Tools (n=80)



The ubiquity of MS Word influences how we think about collaboration.

DITA AND XML ADOPTIONThe State of Collaboration 2012


DITA Experience (n=102)


46% of companies responding have been using DITA for a year or more.

CONTENT CONTRIBUTION, REVIEW, AND APPROVAL

The State of Collaboration 2012


DITA/XML vs. Other Analysis

• In order to understand how adoption of DITA or XML structured authoring affects collaboration, we compared split-samples.

• Samples were:– “DITA/XML”: using DITA/XML for a year or more

(labeled as “Using DITA/XML >1Y” and colored in green)– “Other”: All other organizations (colored in blue).

• Remember: In most groups there is a mix of structured and unstructured authoring and collaboration tools (42% use both).– Note that some “Other” are trying DITA out, and some may

create up to 25% of their documents in DITA/XML.


SME Input to Authors (n=80)



SME Input Methods: DITA vs. Other


Authors interview SMEs and take notes

SMEs supply product documents (e.g. specs, designs)

SMEs author draft content (unstructured)

SMEs author draft content (XML or DITA)

SMEs author draft content (hardcopy)

SMEs and authors co-author draft content (unstructured)

SMEs and authors co-author draft content (XML or DITA)

Author has access to product

Other (please specify)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

74%

61%

48%

7%

4%

17%

26%

65%

9%

67%

64%

64%

6%

12%

42%

6%

64%

12% Other (n=33)

Using DITA/XML >1Y (n=46)

How do SMEs provide input to Authors?


There is significantly less co-authoring and content contribution in organizations using DITA / XML for more than 1 year.

Review and Comment Methods (n=78)



Review and Comment Methods: DITA vs. Other


We distribute PDF documents and review with Acrobat review features

We distribute Word documents and use track changes to collect reviewer comments and proposed changes

We collect comments in email

We use a collaboration portal (e.g. GoogleDocs, e-Room, etc.) to post the document and collect comments and

proposed changes

We review documents with SMEs in virtual meetings and make and approve changes in real-time

We use a DITA or XML tool to collect comments and changes

We collect comments in hardcopy format


0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

57%

20%

52%

22%

39%

26%

26%

11%

58%

64%

58%

15%

39%

6%

33%

9% Other (n=33)


How do SMEs and others review and comment on draft content?


26% of those using DITA / XML for more than 1 year collect changes in DITA or XML. This does not close the gap in the use of Word for collaboration.

Format of Final Review Content (n=78)



Format of Final Review Content: DITA vs. Other


Complete unstructured draft documents ("proofs" without redlines / change bars - includes PDFs)

Complete unstructured draft documents (with redlines / change bars - including PDFs)

Only the portions of unstructured documents that changed

DITA or other XML - only the components that changed

DITA maps built just for review purposes


0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

43%

30%

13%

52%

22%

11%

58%

61%

30%

18%

3%

3% Other (n=33)


Which forms of content do you review and approve?


Over half of those using DITA / XML for more than 1 year only review content that changed, but their use of PDF for review is still widespread.

Review Challenges (n=78)



Review Challenges: DITA vs. Other


Authors have to rekey SME proposed changes

Authors have to reconcile conflicting change requests

Review and approval cycles delays publication of deliverables

Reviewers complain that process requires too much time or effort

Reviewers comment and propose changes on content that was out of scope of the current revision

Reviewers and approvers do not respond in a timely fashion

Record keeping is insufficient for internal or regulatory audit requirements


0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

59%

35%

54%

46%

37%

54%

9%

11%

52%

64%

70%

64%

55%

70%

21%

6% Other (n=33)


Which issues does your organization face for review and comment?


DITA / XML users report less pain in review and approval.

12%

16%

18%

18%

16%

29%

7%

SOCIAL CONTENTThe State of Collaboration 2012


Tracking Views and Social Ratings (n=74)


Only 20% of organizations have readers rate content.

Only 36% of organizations track what is read on-line.

Acting on Social Ratings (n=74)


Organizations that have ratings use them to identify valuable or “ailing” content.

Do Users Contribute? (n=73)


Only 18% of organizations have end-user contribution.

Curating User Contributed Content (n=73)


When end users contribute content, half of organizations curate via the Information Development organization.

IF THERE WAS ONE THING YOU COULD DO TO IMPROVE COLLABORATION IN YOUR ORGANIZATION, WHAT WOULD IT BE?

The State of Collaboration 2012


“One thing you could do …” – Process • Product Lifecycle

– “[Info dev] included earlier in the product development cycle” – Tech Writer– “Better notification from developers of product changes” – Tech Writer– “Better communication about new features that are coming and how they affect

current documentation” – Tech Writer– “Make spec documents from SMEs clear enough that a common controlled

vocabulary can be created, and that spec clearly indicates task flows etc.” – Tech Writer

– “Prevent customer engineering from being a roadblock in getting information about customer goals and needs” – Tech Writer

• Review– “More timely responses from SMEs.” – Tech Writer– “Train SMEs on collaboration techniques.” – Tech Pubs Manager


“Convince reviewers that modular documentation means not having to review entire books.”

Information Development Manager

“One thing you could do…” – Process • End-user Involvement

– “Get more customer feedback into the document development / improvement process.” – Tech Pubs Manager

– “We would like to know how the end users are using our documents.” – Tech Writer• Support

– “Have better coordination with Project Support (the people who actually interact with the customers!)” – Tech Writer


“We would like to know how the end users are using our documents.”

Technical Writer / Information Architect

“One thing you could do …” – Tools • Common Tools

– “An affordable minimal-DITA browser editor for the masses.” – DITA Consultant– “All parties using the same tools to create, review, and manage content.” – Tech

Pubs Manager– “XML/DITA implementation, everyone on same tooling/process” – Tech Writer– “More collaboration that is viewable to all” – Tech Writer– “Offer an easy [DITA] authoring tool … Developers could draft procedures and QA

could write test plans in DITA rather than unstructured.” – Tech Writer


“Offer an easy authoring tool [for DITA]… Developers could draft procedures and QA could write test plans in DITA rather than unstructured.”


“One thing you could do …” – Tools • Review

– “An automated technical review application that will track reviewers, capture input, trigger past due alerts, provides reporting features.” – Tech Pubs Manager

– “Making it easier for simultaneous reviews so that everyone sees the changes in one place” – DITA Consultant

– “Review tool in which in-line comments would be displayed next to the content under review.” – DITA Consultant

– “Ability to archive results of the review in a way that would be accessible to the general public” – DITA Consultant


“Make document draft, review, and final more automated and easy to track”


“One thing you could do …” – Tools • Change Tracking

– “See a history of changes within a document, rather than by comparison of two versions in the CMS” – Other Management

• End-user Involvement– “Provide a way for customers to give direct input to our content” – Tech Pubs

Manager– “Move to a web-based content distribution model and enable feedback from end

users directly.” – Content Production– “Incorporate social media in the products and their help docs to capture the end-

user’s feedback” – Tech Writer


“Move to a web-based content distribution model and enable feedback from end users directly.”

Content Production / Tools Specialist

LESSONS LEARNEDState of Collaboration 2012


Differences in Collaboration Styles with DITA

• There are significant differences in collaboration between organizations that have been using DITA and others

• In organizations using DITA, there appears to be less content contribution from SMEs. Possible explanations:– Organizations that did less collaboration were more likely to adopt DITA– Limited SME access to DITA tools– Limited usability of DITA / XML tools for SMEs

• Organizations using DITA for more than a year have less pain in content review– Probably due to reviewing only those components that changed

• Most organizations don’t appear to have found a DITA replacement for Word-based and PDF-based collaboration.


WHAT DO WE NEED?Collaborating in DITA


What do we need in DITA Collaboration?

Tools built for everyone, available to everyoneEditors built for SME reviewers, not for “DITA users”. Runs on every computer or device. No software to download. Free reviewer licenses.



Clarity around roles: Am I an author? A reviewer? An approver? An observer? A reader?



Limits to Scope Creep: If I have the whole document to review, it’s “open season” for any changes I want to make, even if it’s not my job or in the scope of this review activity. Stop me before I kill again….



Progress Tracking for Review and Input projects: Are we there yet? Who’s finished? Who’s late?



Easy method to Accept / Reject / Merge changes We need to be able to merge everyone’s feedback into a final draft document (like in Word today).



Tracking changes: What changed since the last “official” draft? Since the last time I looked? (like in Word today)



Traceability: Where’s This From? Who approved this?


http://www.flickr.com/photos/timballas/31369414/


Audit trail: An immutable record of who changed what, when, and why. This should include the whole discussion…



Measuring activity / productivity / effectiveness: Who is a role-model collaborator? Who is always holding things up? Who lurks? Who expedites?



Getting feedback from ReadersWas it useful? Was it correct? Can we do better?


WHAT’S POSSIBLE?Collaborating in DITA


Easy-to-use Editors for Contribution and Review

• Editors built for SMEs. Not only do theyhide the complexity of structured authoring…

…. but they use structure to help SMEs contribute


Example: Editing a Task in easyDITA

Easy-to-use Collaboration Tools

• Review and approval tools that provide the best of Word and Acrobat:– Reviewer: Suggest changes (like Acrobat)– Author: Accept / reject changes (like Word)


Example: Review in easyDITA

Reader Ratings and Comments

• Content delivery platforms that capture reader ratings and comments, and route them back to authors. Examples:

• Mekon DITAweb + XMetaL, Suite Solutions Suite Share, easyDITA + MindTouch


Example: Ratings and comments in MindTouch route back to easyDITA authors.

Content Analytics

Dynamic Delivery of DITA content enables measurement of what readers search for, find useful, read, rate.

5/7/2013 60Collaborating in DITA – ©2013 Jorsek LLC, All Rights Reserved

Example: Analytics in MindTouch

http://www.mindtouch.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/analytics.png




THANK YOU!Collaborating in DITA


linkedin.com/in/[email protected]

stc summit 2013: dita collaboration - paul wlodarczyk - easydita 2013-05-07

Technology