Thanks for your questions, Jeremiah.

One of the virtues of a true index, and not a mere directory, is the
"double-posting" of the same entity under different variant names. Thus all
the possible ways that a user might look up concept (whether a named entity
or a generic topic) will be included in the index, with all referring to the
same place within the content. The full name of a department is included in
the index, but also included are any other commonly known names, nicknames,
or abbreviations. If it is important for the internal stakeholders that
their full department name be the "preferred" name, cross-reference can be
used in the index.

For example, a department is called "Distribution and Order Fulfillment
Department" within Customer Services.
The index will have up to five entries:

Customer Services
Distribution and Order Fulfillment Department

Distribution and Order Fulfillment Department

DOF department. See Distribution and Order Fulfillment Department

fulfillment, order (department). See Distribution and Order
Fulfillment Department

order fulfillment department. See Distribution and Order Fulfillment
Department

Each entry is hyperlinked to the same page for the department. Even the
entries that have "See" references would link to the actual page and not to
elsewhere within the index. There is no need to require the user to make an
additional click within the index. But at least with the cross-reference in
the user has been educated to what the correct name is.

Note that there is no need for an entry:
distribution department See Distribution and Order Fulfillment
Department
because in the index, it would lie next to the entry for Distribution and
Order Fulfillment Department.

You will also notice that the correct department name is capitalized, while
the variants are not, which is another way of indicating to the user what
the correct department name is. An index may combine both named entities,
such as departments, and topical subjects.

It's still a good idea to have a department directory in addition to an
index on the intranet, because the directory is shorter to browse through,
and some users remember complete names better than others. If formal
department names are not well known, then, instead of an alphabetical
directory, an organizational classification of the department names would be
better as a directory format.

I hope this answers your questions.

Heather Hedden
Coordinator, Web Indexing SIG
American Society of Indexers
http://www.web-indexing.org

-------------------------------------------
Hedden Information Management
Carlisle, MA
Tel. 978-371-0822
http://www.Hedden-Information.com


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeremiah Owyang" <jeremiah_owyang@...>
To: <intranet-user-experience@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 4:13 PM
Subject: Re: [intranetUX] A-Z indexes and outsourcing

> Heather

> Great to hear about your specialization in Indexing! Can you describe to
us common and best practice methods to determining nomenclature for index
items?

> For example, some of our indexes that we use for our enterprise intranet
are very long departmental names that may have little or no value to the
common user. How do you determine what the appropriate name will be?

> I even know of some horrible cases where a department wanted to be at the
top of the list, so they added "academy" in front of their listing.

> How do you deal with internal stakeholders that insist that their full
department name or program be put on the index?

> Thanks for sharing your expertise and wisdom with us.

> Jeremiah