Catch a Ride to Self-Service Knowledge
October 02, 2017
Catch a Ride to Self-Service Knowledge
Score 9 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Software Version
MindTouch Responsive
Overall Satisfaction with MindTouch
Initially, we chose Mindtouch as a solution for authoring and publishing technical product documentation and support FAQs/knowledge base. Operationally, we were looking for an out-of-the-box, cloud-based documentation solution where writers can easily create content, collaborate, and publish. For customers, we wanted to move from PDFs to self-service support. Mindtouch checked all these boxes for us. Feedback from the field has been positive.
Since our launch, other departments expressed interest in using Mindtouch for their content or are now using Mindtouch to publish best practices, videos, and other customer-facing content.
Since our launch, other departments expressed interest in using Mindtouch for their content or are now using Mindtouch to publish best practices, videos, and other customer-facing content.
- The initial launch - prepping the site for go-live. We were able to brand our site with minimal customizations and minimal technical support. Mindtouch provides a semi-structured architecture for organizing content - once you are familiar with this model - it was easy for us to organize our content.
- The editor is awesome. Seasoned tech writers and occasional writers can easily write, and publish their content with minimal training and support. Tech writers appreciate abilities for advanced techniques, such as content reuse, linking, or embedding JavaScript. Occasional writers appreciate the ease-of-use and a familiar editor ui (such MS Word).
- Publishing workflow and revision tracking. Tech writers working on content for feature releases appreciate the edit live or edit as a draft features. We use edit as a draft when collaborating with SMEs - enabling SMEs to co-write as a Draft Contributor. Revision history is great for either reverting content OR reviewing change history -- especially when multiple authors are involved.
- Mindtouch is a great alternative to traditional technical documentation authoring solutions (HATs). We appreciate that content can be viewed as a knowledgebase and as contextual help from the application. My team is more productive and able to deliver more quality documentation - on time.
- Localization/translation solution and workflow is cumbersome. At the moment we translate to one language, but can foresee complexities in change management if we needed to manage many locales.
- Improved documentation on advanced topics, such as working with underlying css classes and understanding dependencies. Overall though, Mindtouch documentation has improved significantly over the years.
- Our operational efficiently has improved significantly. Prior to Mindtouch, we managing duplicate content in two separate authoring solutions. Delivering content predictably and consistently was difficult and stressful for writers. In Mindtouch, we were able to optimize our content (remove redundancies) giving us more time to test, review, and improve content quality.
- Traffic to our knowledge center is increasing monthly.
- Internally, SMEs and customer-facing teams are recognizing the value Mindtouch brings through self-service knowledge. These SMEs want to contribute more to content, either as contributing writers or collaborators with tech writers.
Yes - We were using Framemaker and Robohelp.
They are outdated technologies. They were not implemented to optimize single-sourcing.
These tools didn't easily facilitate collaboration. For new writers, training and getting ramped up on these tools was time-consuming. Re-implementing and refactoring using these tools was considered. In the end, we didn't believe these tools were positioned for the future or help improve our efficiency and ultimately - quality.
They are outdated technologies. They were not implemented to optimize single-sourcing.
These tools didn't easily facilitate collaboration. For new writers, training and getting ramped up on these tools was time-consuming. Re-implementing and refactoring using these tools was considered. In the end, we didn't believe these tools were positioned for the future or help improve our efficiency and ultimately - quality.