Roadmap for Knowledge Base

Justin_Clarke

I just wanted to ask if anyone has any update on the roadmap for the Knowledge Base?

Seems to be alot of requests in the this discussion but havent seen any updates to knowledge base in recent versions.

james_kleinschnitz

We do our best to take all feature request into consideration and as we build our backlogs/roadmaps we focus on the top 3 most requested features.  At this time I don't see any Knowledge Base features even in the top ten. So at this point, there are no Knowledge Base features on the roadmap.

Is there something in particular that you are looking for?

Justin_Clarke

Hi James

The features i would be looking for would be  

1. Allowing Analysts or a group of users access to create articles without being KB Manager. That way they can submit draft etc and a KB manager could reformat or make sure it is ok to publish.

2. Version control of articles, so if another person modifies an article it can be restored to previous version.

3. Article Templates - Have template options available for article writers to keep formatting as a standard. Both for Analayst and end user content.
 
4. More user friendly WYSIWYG editor, especially when copying from Word or PDF. Currently a lot of extra formatting and adjustments need to be made. Using an online HTML convertor for internal documents is not a really viable option. Maybe an import word or pdf?

Most of these are already requests but must not be high enough votes.

Thanks for getting back to me.

Marek_Lefek

@james_kleinschnitz, as wrote @Justin_Clarke, in my opinion point 3,4 are more needed.
I could also add:
5. Simple linking to other articles, as: [[Refenece: How to]] - mediwiki style with page name prompts.
6. Setting related articles - with title prompts.
7. Tag cloud with top 15 tags.
8. Headings menu for analyst section.

Tom_Hendricks

Barely related anecdote regarding #5: I had asked about this before we even purchased the portal.  Travis Wright himself emailed me to say no.

#1 required customization, but we were able to implement it.  This really should be part of the OOB product, though.

#4 is the only one that I like a lot, but seems a bit lofty to me.  Speaking only for myself, I would be fine letting that be a request all of its own.

All of the rest of these are absolutely fantastic suggestions, and are already feature requests.  One of them is mine, in fact.  It is sitting around ~30 votes.  Is 30 not significant enough to enter into the dev cycle?

james_kleinschnitz

@Tom_Hendricks
The top Feature requests have over 70 votes.

Tom_Hendricks

Sorting by "top" feature requests, there are 3 over 70 for the portal currently, and one that is very close.  Of the 3 over 70 votes, they are over a year old.  Scrolling downward, the rest are all from 2016, except for 2, (one of which is KB templates, stuck in the 50's--but that is a pretty big number, compared to the bulk of the list).

I will not argue the logic of addressing requests in order of most votes, but I will share that as a customer, I do not see much movement or change in that list. A handfull are in the backlog, but only one is in development and it is a really big one (CI forms).  Maybe our expectations need to be adjusted, which might actually help with getting others to rally behind certain features.

Jonathan_Boles

Good Afternoon @james_kleinschnitz, I've noticed there's quite a few there towards the top (I've got a few on the first page myself that I'm hoping will get attention someday )

To @Tom_Hendricks point, while there's a ton of requests sitting in the 30-50 vote range many of these are in more specific "sections" of the portal. It would be nice if certain things like the Cireson Knowledge Base had it's own section for voting and suggestions. 

This is more of a "positive" complaint/suggestion! It's absolutely awesome that the portal has grown so much in the past couple of years, but with that growth, perhaps it would be good to look at breaking up the feature requests into additional categories. 

This would help those requests that are for specific sections of the portal (such as the Knowledge Base or Search) get a bit more attention.

Just thought I'd throw out a mention of this in case it might be of help.

Conner_Wood

Tom_Hendricks said:

Maybe our expectations need to be adjusted

I think expectations in the form of deadlines and weekly status/progress updates need to be publicly announced by Cireson, preferably in the Events and News section.

Why?  To avoid the "Asset BarCode API License still requires old version" or "WatchList Doesn't Send an Email Out of Box" outcomes.... these outcomes failed customer expectations and by extension, threads were locked never to be commented on again.

Now, Cireson giving the cold hard truth that "X" simply isn't going to happen no matter how many votes can and will cause concern and backlash.  This is why successful politicians/businessmen/authority have learned how to evade answering a question, it keeps them in power longer, keeps the trust of those they need something from.

The Cireson Community Forums is a major accomplishment, us customers are no longer isolated from each other and could be more informed than ever before.  Telling the truth, regardless of accuracy (You can tell the truth and be accidentally wrong) should already be set as an expectation by customers.  Ultimately, it's up to each and every customer to decide what they prefer to be: strung along or informed.

Vote with your wallet, reward behaviour you want more of, and take calculated risks.