What does your Knowledge "Data Governance" look like?

[nebula]

I’m looking to understand what everyone’s Knowledge Governance looks like at their company — or if that even exists? Does ServiceNow provide any guidance on how to best maintain article integrity, lifecycle, and process for authors?

For example, we have Ownership Groups set up so that articles are approved by the appropriate team before reaching the Knowledge Manager. However, we’re running into cases where the app owner writes documentation, but others outside the team also contribute articles. These external contributors often aren’t aware of updates and don’t maintain their content, especially after upgrades. Their articles also don’t include the app’s ownership group, so the original team isn’t aware of new content unless they run a report.

This brings up a few questions:

• What’s the best way to handle documentation ownership between an application and a team’s process?
• If a team needs the app team's input or collaboration, how can that be reflected in the knowledge ownership process?
• Since ServiceNow only allows one Ownership Group per article, is there another way to connect two separate groups for visibility and accountability?

Would love to hear how others are managing this.

[Aerin]

We don't have an enterprise KM process here - that's a whole other discussion - and I'm still getting buy-in from our department, but knowledge governance is something I think about at night. In theory, here is how I envision it. The operational support team for the tool should own and write the documentation about how the tool works. Teams using the tool should write their procedures around how they use the tool.

I fully expect, given the silo'd nature of our environment, that this will cause clashes as more teams start writing documentation, because these two sides of this often aren't doing a great job of communicating right now. I think potentially, if I can get my moderator hat on, that it should lead to stronger work in the end, because it will force people to look outside their own team and understand their part in the bigger picture. This should be supported by the fact that I am fighting hard to limit the number of knowledge bases and leaving the article access as wide as I can. People tend to think that their documents need to be locked down, but there actually isn't an business reason for that in 99% of cases. Knowledge is a resource that is most valuable when shared, not hoarded.

Fingers crossed. LOL

[nebula]

I feel you in this response 😂

We also have multiple knowledge bases and are trying to avoid creating new ones where possible. I agree that knowledge should be accessible to all, though I do see some value in having separate spaces for manager-specific content or data governance materials, especially when dealing with sensitive client information.

You brought up a great point about the disconnect between teams and the owners of the app. I think we’ve experienced something similar, which makes me wonder if the real issue lies more in how teams collaborate than in the knowledge management process itself. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

[Aerin]

Yes, the collaboration piece is often weak or missing. I guess I see the role of knowledge management here more as the tool to shine the spotlight on that lack and maybe provide a tool to help strengthen that piece. It's a challenge, for sure, though.

[Rafael Batistot]

Hi @nebula 

Let me know if this article make sense for you 

https://www.servicenow.com/community/in-other-news/learn-how-to-implement-knowledge-management-gover...