Comments on: What are the trigger points? http://www.fastforwardblog.com/2007/01/21/what-are-the-trigger-points/ Fri, 20 Nov 2009 20:29:35 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Paula Thornton http://www.fastforwardblog.com/2007/01/21/what-are-the-trigger-points/comment-page-1/#comment-498 Paula Thornton Mon, 22 Jan 2007 20:12:19 +0000 http://fastforwardblog.com/2007/01/21/what-are-the-trigger-points/#comment-498 It's an issue both of 'integration' and 'draw'. The activities must be integrated with relevant, daily work. When you hit an intranet to launch out to another application the interface has changed. Most 'purchased' interfaces are deplorable, and are not optimized for specific work. Even in the case of existing corporate 'applications' (I use the term lightly) the potential I saw with my last account was to re-face existing applications and cull out functions based on use. For example, the client had a Lotus Notes based application as a corporate directory. While you could find some very valuable information and/or ways to slice and dice the data, the reality is that for the majority of instances (no hard data available), people needed either a phone number or a location (and/or other information conveniently found in a person's profile). With a goal to get indivduals as quickly as possible to existing profiles (no changes to the stuff behind the scenes) a 2.0'ish PeopleFinder was created. Blank box with a search logo (similar to upper right sample here http://www.cssbeauty.com/). Borrowing the Yahoo! Autocomplete design pattern code, just by typing the persons's first or last name, a list of valid options appear for selection and the profile is directly accessed. No switching buttons in the interface to specify the entry as first name or last name, or department, etc. The true value of 2.0 is in simplifying functions via the interface. It’s an issue both of ‘integration’ and ‘draw’. The activities must be integrated with relevant, daily work. When you hit an intranet to launch out to another application the interface has changed. Most ‘purchased’ interfaces are deplorable, and are not optimized for specific work.

Even in the case of existing corporate ‘applications’ (I use the term lightly) the potential I saw with my last account was to re-face existing applications and cull out functions based on use. For example, the client had a Lotus Notes based application as a corporate directory. While you could find some very valuable information and/or ways to slice and dice the data, the reality is that for the majority of instances (no hard data available), people needed either a phone number or a location (and/or other information conveniently found in a person’s profile). With a goal to get indivduals as quickly as possible to existing profiles (no changes to the stuff behind the scenes) a 2.0′ish PeopleFinder was created. Blank box with a search logo (similar to upper right sample here http://www.cssbeauty.com/). Borrowing the Yahoo! Autocomplete design pattern code, just by typing the persons’s first or last name, a list of valid options appear for selection and the profile is directly accessed. No switching buttons in the interface to specify the entry as first name or last name, or department, etc.

The true value of 2.0 is in simplifying functions via the interface.

]]>