How do you determine the best ownership group?

[DavidBReynolds]

My company just turned on Ownership Groups. We already have a very limited number of approval groups (7) that can approve articles.

How do I determine which of the 479 Ownership Groups to select when writing a new knowledge article or updating an existing one?

What methods do you use to select ownership groups?

Thank-you for your guidance.

[Rene Dugas]

Hi David,

We have a "configuration item" field on our KB submission form.

Once the CI is entered, it's fills in the ownership group wich in our case is the support group for that specific CI.

Depending on how your CMDB is setup, it might be a good method for you .

For us, at the moment our CMDB is too big, hard to understand and not all strings are properly attached with the support groups. So, for now we cannot use what I am describing above.

Hope this helps !

Rene

[shannont]

Hi @DavidBReynolds ,

We are currently in the middle of our move to a new greenfield instance utilizing OOB capabilities; one of which is OGs for our article approval workflow.  Our plan involves mirroring our assignment/support groups automatically so that our knowledge workers can easily determine which OG to populate in the required field.  We are then populated those groups with our KCS Coaches.

[Aga_Sznajder]

In our case we also used the resolver groups as a base and created new ownership groups focused on what the team is doing. It is an environment for GBS, so we have HR, Finance etc. We use Service Portfolio to assign articles to items. Our main challenge is how to make sure approvers are within ownership groups, but with specific km approver role. Also, each group has defined category and subcategories in the common base available for end users and a separate base to be used by their team. In IT it would be different, as L1 support would have their internal base with knowledge from all teams, so the categories would be even more important. In older instances there were also topic to be selected when creating article - it is still possible to turn them on in current instance. I was using it to define type of document - FAQ, SOP, instruction, etc.

I'm afraid OOB solution for KM is not perfect if you'd like to ensure secure, measurable, comprehensive base.

[Leri Andrews]

Hi

I hope this is related enough to post here. 

How do you use the KCS coach roles and ownership group manager roles to give countries/regions/teams more self-sufficiency to understand the quality of their knowledge and the actions required of them this month?

Context:

We are now very nearly OOTB with knowledge and no longer have any 'knowledge approver' roles as the Ownership groups act as approver groups. Our IT knowledge base use CI in the same way as Rene to map the ownership groups and this works well for IT because they are set up for ITSM.  HR though is a bit different because not all knowledge is owned by the HR equivalent of resolver groups.  e.g. all the benefit information is owned by the reward team for each market and there are also company-wide articles that apply to all markets.  

So I have a single global ownership group and then one for each market.

What I am struggling with is the OOTB way that all feedback gets assigned to the ownership group manager but every member of the ownership group get the notification.  Same with expiry - one month before, everyone in the ownership group gets and email "120 articles will expire'" when only 1 might be their speciality.

Additionally, advisors get given a knowledge role with their HR case access but unless they apply to be a member of the ownership group they will not have access to edit any articles.  This leads to the weird situation where they can create an article but the moment they assign it to the group, they can no longer maintain it.

Add to this the weird way that the author remains subscribed to their articles and gets notifications even if they move roles and leave the ownership group, and the strange decision to only allow knowledge managers to see dashboard reports on knowledge, I have to agree with Aga that the OOTB solution for knowledge is not very well designed. Also be aware that if your HR knowledge is built in the HR scope, you may run into some strange problems e.g. auto-translation tasks can't get through the HR wall, the turn comments off script doesn't work on HR articles.