denotes premium content | Feb 8 2012 
Regular
posted 31 Aug 2004 in Volume 1 Issue 3
Could less eventually mean more?
As enterprises watch chunks of their budget being spent on expensive and comprehensive search and retrieval solutions, research shows people are still finding the task difficult. Meanwhile, writes Harry Wilson, some corporate names you might recognise are slowly beginning to edge into the market with web and desktop-based search solutions designed to be simple, cheap and effective.
“When you go in search of honey, you must expect to be stung by bees.” – Kenneth Kaunda, first president of Zambia.
When he uttered these words, the autocratic former ruler of the southern African nation probably had no idea they would one day be used as a metaphor for the plight enterprise-search-engine users face today.
Although stretched somewhat in this instance, the message is still applicable to those who search, often fruitlessly, for the data they need to do their jobs.
And while conceivable that not finding business-critical information could lead to a stress-induced headache, the more common complaint is that it leads to wasted time and lost profits.
In a June 2004 survey of over 300 IT and line-of-business managers from all industries, Delphi Group1 reported the effectiveness of information retrieval is showing signs of improvement. Nearly 60 per cent of those surveyed said that finding information they need to get their jobs done has become ‘better or easier’ over the past two years. At first glance, these are glowing numbers, but they don’t do much to salve the aforementioned sting. The same survey reveals 68 per cent of people still ranked search and retrieval as ‘difficult or time consuming’.
When search and retrieval solutions don’t return results, it’s for one of three reasons, the survey suggests. First, the data changes constantly, which frustrates the ability of the search technology. Second, search tools are unable to find what they’re being asked to look for with a reasonable degree of accuracy. Last, people often don’t know exactly what they’re looking for when they start their investigations, and their search tools aren’t helpful in discovering topic areas or key relationships across the many information repositories in the enterprise. Whether this is related to improper training, ineffective systems or a combination of both is impossible to say.
Not surprisingly, the same survey reveals 62 per cent expressed dissatisfaction or extreme dissatisfaction with the tools they are using to find information.
It is this last point that enterprises should find the most worrying. Having spent the money on systems designed to help them maximise the value of their information assets, many are now watching users abandon them because they are frustrating to use.
As we mentioned in the July/August issue’s ‘Last word’ feature, a big part of the solution to this problem centres on proper organisation, tagging and archiving of material; create a detailed taxonomy that your search engine can work around and a large part of search user’s frustration will melt away.
But there are other, perhaps simpler, options on the horizon. Indeed, in an August 2004 study2, analysts IDC predict 2006 will be a watershed year for enterprise search and retrieval. The study says the market will “experience a shift from sustaining innovation upgrades to large enterprise customers to a more disruptive mode in which simpler, more packaged solutions are offered to smaller-scale enterprises at a fraction of the present price”.
With this sort of prediction, it’s easy to see where web-search giant Google comes into the picture. The Google Search Appliance (GSA) is the company’s enterprise-search offering aimed at searching intranets and public-facing websites for information. It’s cheap, comes in three different sizes and is based around the famed Google search technology.
The company has quietly collected some big-name customers, such as Xerox and the World Bank, both of which laud the system for its ease of use. However, the GSA has had its shortcomings pointed out – lack of tie-in to non-web-enabled features to name one - with what, at times, seems like relish by critics.
Still, analysts aren’t dismissing Google completely. In its May 2004 report, research and analysis company Gartner placed Google in the ‘challengers’ section of its magic quadrant for enterprise search, alongside Open Text.
Despite being a relative neophyte to the enterprise-search game, Google will likely continue to be a player. The company is due to release a product called Puffin, software that will search the web and files on your computer. Although a far cry from the ‘leader’ label the Gartner report places on industry leaders like Autonomy, FAST and Verity, the idea of an innovator like Google moving (albeit slowly) into more comprehensive and cheaper search technologies might scare some. By the same token, desktop giants Microsoft and Apple could be perceived as potential threats as their much-hyped battle over search capabilities in their new operating systems continues to get coverage in the technology press.
In the meantime, businesses will continue to employ more expensive and (for now) comprehensive solutions to cope with their search and retrieval needs. The challenge will be to deploy a strategy that keeps users engaged and allows the business as a whole to realise a tangible return on its investment.
References
1. www.delphigroup.com/about/pressreleases/2004-PR/20040616-research.htm
