To provide a little background, Funnel Back is a search technology developed and commercialised by CSIRO.
It has been deployed in Australia.gov.au as their Whole-of-Government search technology as my agency's website search tool (as a hosted solution) and in many other agencies and companies across Australia and other countries.
It's a reasonably good search engine if some time is spent configuring it and I've been happy with the search success levels we achieve (though always trying to improve them).
AGIMO recently invited my agency to participate in the live pilot test of Funnel Back's new search feature - Fluster (50kb PDF).
In brief Fluster helps users find what they are looking for by offering alternative phrases to refine their search terms.
An example of this in action is visible in Australia.gov.au - simply use the search and look at the Related Search area at the right of the page.
We've been trialing this feature within our site for a little over a month now and I have an initial view on how Fluster has been performing.
How Fluster is doing
Initially I was concerned about the relevancy of the topics and phrases that Fluster would choose to display. This hasn't proven to be an issue, Fluster is providing highly relevant results.
However I'm not convinced that people are using the tool effectively. We've seen no measureable change in the search success rate and I do not have evidence that visitors to our site are using the Fluster Related Search area when searching.
This could be an education issue. We currently present Fluster in the search results page without any form of help, meaning that our visitors are not guided to the tool.
It could also reflect that improvements are necessary in the reporting of Fluster use so we can determine if the tool is assisting people find what they need. These reports are still being refined by Funnel Back.
Another factor I keep in mind is the trend towards more sophisticated internet users.
A large proportion of people are very familiar with Google and other 'generic' search engines and have learnt to use phrases rather than individual words to increase the relevance of results.
In fact, the average length of a search term in Google exceeded four words at the end of 2007 - at least according to WebProNews which reports that People Are Finding More Words To Search With.
This means that people are already refining their own search terms, potentially reducing the value in having a search engine do it for them.
In conclusion
So my preliminary conclusion is that Fluster can add value to search results.
However more time will be required to really understand the impact it is having and test ways to help people use it effectively.
While internet users are becoming more sophisticated, this doesn't negate the value of Fluster. There are always new people coming into the user pool and even experienced users may on occasion find that Fluster suggests a topic or phrase that they had not considered but leads them to a relevant result.
Friday, June 27, 2008
Review: Funnel Back''s new search feature - Flusters | Tweet |
Top level internet domains for dollars | Tweet |
If you have a spare US$50-100,000 you may be able to buy your own top-level internet domain from ICANN (the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers).
ICANN moderates top level domains around the world. These domains, such as .com, .net, .com.au and .gov.au, are the basic naming structure of the internet and control what organisations and nations can do online.
Previously there were very tight controls over the naming structure and an extensive review process before new top level domains were created - of which very few were.
However the new regulations effectively allow any organisation - private or public - to register top level domains, subject to a much simpler review process and a payment.
I do not expect to see much impact on government in Australia - the .gov.au domain is well established and strongly mandated. However it now becomes much easier for states or councils to consider different naming - such as .nswgovernment or .sutherlandshire
In the private sector it's hard to say - previous releases of top level names have not seen significant attrition from the .com (or .com.au in Australia) names, but the alternatives haven't been that much better.
However with any top level domain name now possible, there is the possibility for greater fragmentation.
Time will tell.
More information on this decision is available at ItNews, ICANN proposes greater top-level domain name flexibility.
There's also a good opinion piece over at VentureBeat, ICANN threatens to change the rules of the domain name game
Slides from Web Directions Government now available online | Tweet |
I heard some good reports from people who attended Web Directions Government back in May.
For those of you, like me, who missed it, Web Directions South has made a number of the presentations and podcasts available online via their blog, Web Directions Government resources now online.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Participate in the Global Intranet Survey | Tweet |
Last year my agency participated in the Global Intranet Survey for the first time.
The report from the survey has proven very useful in our intranet planning and given me a number of ideas that we've been able to apply in the ongoing management of our intranet.
The survey is on again this year, we're participating again and I'd recommend the same to other intranet managers.
Sign up for the Global Intranet Survey 2008
International view: government mostly failing online | Tweet |
Earlier this year The Economist released a special report on egovernment, entitled The Electronic Bureaucrat.
The report's conclusion was that whilst there were a few good examples of egovernment initiatives, most could not be considered successful.
It's a fascinating read regarding international views and experiences in the area and flags changes that government needs to make to be effective online, including;
- personalising services for citizens, storing preferences to make returning easier,
- delivering 24/7 availability,
- making online services at least as easy to use as the equivalent offline processes,
- being as well designed and easy to use as online services provided by the private sector - as this is what customers expect, and
- engaging with other online services - making content findable in search engines and cross-publishing with online news and social media tools to leverage reach.
Key points in the report include that technology is only half, or less, of the picture. As much time is required to review and redevelop government strategy, structures and processes as to put in place enabling systems.
One big lesson is that e-government is not just about computers; it involves redesigning the way government works.The report also suggests that competition is important, and huge scale centralised projects are much less successfully than smaller ones.
Still, the experience of the past ten years suggests a common pattern of which all countries, rich and poor alike, should take note. Centralised schemes tend to work much less well than decentralised ones, and competition is vital.My key takeaway from the report was that while government around the world sees the importance and value in moving service delivery and citizen interactions online, few have made the structural, cultural and process changes required to fully embrace the channel.
This reflects my own experiences as to why government is slow at embracing social media.
What's your takeaway?