In hindsight, we recognise the good stories and communications and wince at the bad ones. One thing the internet can provide is a way to tell the good from the bad a lot quicker, and avoid some of the blunders (those which mature quickly). T.

I should add that some of these tracking frameworks (to tell what works and what doesn't) are dangerous. The notion (trick?) is to identify poor comms as soon as possible. The danger is that what looks good in the beginning may end up in tears (eg, driving interest, but not solid behaviour), while some of the best things in life take time to settle in (eg, wine). T.

Very true -- look at Snakes on a Plane -- huge buzz -- everyone predicted blockbuster becuae of Internet traffic and it was a major bust. Bad movie; bad content...

What jumped out to me was the word "skilled". The tradesman knows the difference between clutter and useful tools. Johnson's notion of "type B knowledge = search capability" was essentially a know how kind of knowledge. Anyone can push the search button, but is that really searching? Anyone can start to build a dog house (I speak from experience), but only the dogs know whether they're satisfied... Tom.

David, I was sitting around the house on Saturday night and had a 3 hour conversation about how we learn, store, and recall information in our brains (I must be a nerd). What irony in getting this quote this morning. My point was that if you do not have a specific perspective when you learn something, that you will never be able to store that information in a manner that is useful to recall the information later. Further, without the ability to draw relations in the information you decide to store in an organized fashion in your brain – you lose creativity – you lose innovation – you lose the ability to visualize the totality – and focus on the specifics rather than the big picture. Specifics are important in developing a perspective of clarity of the parts. But, understanding the big picture is potentially more important – to see which specifics are in ‘big bold font’ – or where the specific emphasis lies in your ‘business’ (EX// the classic Coke recipe change-up). Continuous Improvement has nearly become a staple in Modern Information Businesses. If it’s not broke than fix it mentalities. I’m with you 100% there. When you refer to tools below, and imply that with the increased availability and accuracy of this toolage, we will be able to strive for new levels of innovation / creativity / accuracy – I believe you may be implying that if we free our brains of the “useless facts elbowing out the useful ones” VIA toolage, we will be able to achieve more true Eureka moments. This is truly a dichotomy, whereby we must be careful that the toolage we employ doesn’t undermine the creative / innovative part of our thoughts. Such that we are not too closely tied to the specifics, or abstracted from the intent, such that we understand the purpose of what we are doing, and how that purpose fits into the greater scheme of what the business is doing. For example, an employee performs analysis on a set of figures. The fact that the employee must repeat the same sequence of steps leads the employee toward innovation – and that employee may suggest a creative solution to this repetition (seeks to cut Noise, Confusion, Distraction). It is the repetition, noise, confusion, and distraction - with the perspective to understand the purpose of the task - that may lead the employee toward implementing a specific software tool to streamline his problem. However, in implementing this software tool the employee now stands to inherit a different set of repetitious tasks. The downside to this is that the employee is now lead in a different direction to innovate / create. They now see their problem as being: “I have to tab too many times through the user interface”. I ask, where is the true Eureka moment here? Was it before the toolage was implemented or after? I’d suggest it was before – when they were closer to the numbers, and dealt with noise, confusion, and distraction – when they knew how the calculations were performed – when they understood how the specifics, fit in to achieve the big picture goal. The noise makes them smarter, allows them to process and store information with a specific perspective. And in doing this they draw a relation to a software app, they found Eureka. I’ve seen too many times in too many businesses, software solutions being implemented that actually degrade the overall intelligence of the business – because they are idiot proof and repetitive. Users have a tendency to merely follow the steps, rather than truly understand why they are performing the steps. It’s not to be underestimated that knowledge is the sum of what we know, and what we can acquire, and that tools may aid us in focusing on what we can improve next – BUT - too frequently tools aid us in what we can acquire. In doing this, we lose the information we’ve stored in our brain with a specific perspective, and lose the ability to draw those relationships in our head that lead to the truly innovative leapfrog type of change you are talking about; where we stand up and shout EUREKA!!! My question then becomes, how do we manage EUREKA moments, such that we can become more intelligent, all the while improving the efficiencies / effectiveness of our process, in employing these new information tools? Anyway, I felt that I’d share these idea’s / opinions with you. Hope you can take it with a bit of a grain of salt mixed with a grain of philosophy! Regardless, I thought it would be nice to get some feedback. Interesting text! Cheers, Matt P.S., I'm going to link to you and repost the below on my blog.

The Johnson quote is completely analagous to search engine behavior. All users start in the query field with one of two goals -- recovery (what they knew) or discovery (what they don't). From there they can proceed towards different objectives of information or resource collection. Incredibly Google and the other search engines do provide value as a tool helping people find even the things they know themselves. The fact that so many people use search engines as a navigational tool (instead of just typing hte URL inthe browser) is testament to that...and I think helps make your point.

Jonathan, I'm really glad you brought up Search. It is not by accident that Search and the never ending process of refining it, is the single most important topic in the digital age. It is the point at which everyone begins. Search changes how we behave, how we live and learn. It changes our expectations and relationships with people, companies and brands. It has completely changed the way companies go to market and how consumers act within that marketplace. It is the compass, the tool, by which I am enlightened. Information is no longer tied to a specific location. Content is separate from the medium. It is indexed, tagged, chunked and bookmarked - and Search is my navigator that takes me to the information that is specific to my needs, whether I knew it once or never at all. Search is the ultimate personalization tool and it has set the standard for all other applications and tools to follow. Cut the clutter. It should be Google-simple. Let me enter my query and deliver me just the information I need.

But isnt delivering the information you need also the accountability of the company in question? if I dont optimize; if I dont make it easy to find and relevant to teh search -- no matter how good teh algorythm -- naDA

A sat nav system will strip you of visual beauty when driving - calculating to the minute where you're supposed to go - you end up driving on a 2" screen, nevermind what's out of the windshield. But the www and internet is a bit more vast than driving routes metaphorically speaking or not. Without the www we'd all be working towards the same goals, all trying to figure out the same thing, and if you hit jackpot, who is there to tell? No-one or very little people. A good way to communicate findings and make our future brighter. Why spend days trying to solve what others have done? Surely with this saving of time we can expand our idea's and move forward, one step ahead of the game!

I suggest everyone see Tracey & Hepburn in Desk Set. What did I use to do - call the "ask the library" number. A generation of people lacking in the social skills of communication is too one-dimensional to consider.

To all you intrepid road trippers out there, check out the newly enhanced Microsoft Live Search at http://www.live.com Video and Image search are the best in the business, and the standard search is highly relevant. Google not being a client, we should all set Live Search as our default search engine. :-)

Again, quoting Douglas Adams: '"Forty-two!" yelled Loonquawl. "Is that all you've got to show for seven and a half million years' work?" "I checked it very thoroughly," said the computer, "and that quite definitely is the answer. I think the problem, to be quite honest with you, is that you've never actually known what the question is."' Loonquawl's anger is equal to someone getting irked at a search engine after not getting the answer they want. The search engine answered the question that was asked. If you put a single word into a search engine, you're providing zero context. It's the equivalent of walking up to a librarian and saying a single word, and expecting them to give you exactly the answer you need. I use a search engine exactly as I used to look up facts at a library...or when asking an expert in their field. Start general, and hone your question until you get to the answer you need. This process also has the added benefit of potentially helping you find questions you didn't know you had...and helps you shape your refined questions. "Computers are useless. They can only give you answers." Pablo Picasso. True statement. But a person can use those answers to help formulate better questions, if they approach it in that manner, rather than just expecting a specific answer from a vague question.

great postings all -- and live should be your search engine -- try it -- and comment.. Glenn you prove my point --