Writing on the Archive Media Partners blog, Kim Schroeder discusses the issues that can result from trying to use automated indexing or low-quality human resources who lack an understanding of the nuances of the subject matter.
She points out that the cost savings that these alternatives claim to offer are illusory and the costs of fixing the problems they can create can negatively impact ROI far more than using professional high quality indexing staff for asset cataloguing initiatives from the outset:
“Money is tight and people are even more apt to cut corners now. It is always cheaper and more accurate to plan something out and do it right rather than to try and fix it afterwards. Building a business case for the step by step process of tracking assets, designing metadata, the costs of hardware/software/maintenance, training, etc. is often looked at as daunting or impossible. It is not. You have to think like a cost accountant to spell out the savings and efficiency gained. There is also often a publicity component to having an organized and highly accessible collection. This is something that needs to be built in to the value.” [Read More]
- Can Enterprise Taxonomy Management Survive Analyst Reticence - And Does Anyone Else Care Anyway?
- The Role Of Taxonomy Governance In DAM Interoperability Initiatives
- Google's Visual Case Study Of The Perils And Politics Of Automated Metadata
- The Perils And Politics Of Automated Metadata Generation
- Understanding And Implementing Metadata Standards In Digital Asset Management Initiatives