Re: Knowledge Base stats for a "good" number of views?

[John G <john -at- garisons -dot- com>]

My company's entire suite of products' online help exist in separate
knowledge spaces inside one large knowledge base (we're talking some
thousands of pages). Each app's KS is tracked for number of hits, search
terms, etc.  The help pages with the most hits correlate closely with the
app pages with the most help center calls. As a result, we are constantly
looking at how to improve both the app pages and their help to make them
easier to use, more complete ... just, better. This reduces our support
costs in the long run if we do it well.

Use the information to identify customer pain points - if they encounter a
problem, they're more likely to look at the help. I'm not sure that there
is a "normal" hit rate. Just because a help page doesn't get a lot of views
doesn't mean it's not necessary, but it may mean that it's working just
fine and that the app page it supports is working fine, too.

My 2Â,

JG

On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 1:26 PM Nina Rogers <janina -dot- rogers -at- gmail -dot- com> wrote:

> Hi, all!
>
> My company recently looked at the stats for our KB (which I manage), and
> they are not happy with them. Of the 326 articles in the KB, 91 articles
> are getting 80% of the views while 235 articles are getting 20% of the
> views.
>
> I realize there is always room for improvement in any KB, but I'm not as
> upset over these numbers as management is. We have certain features in our
> software that are rarely used, and a good portion of our articles are for
> special, uncommon use cases and legacy versions of the software--and are
> stored in a folders labeled as such. So I wouldn't expect certain articles
> to get a great number of views.
>
> I am wondering where I might find information on what would be considered
> "good" view rates for a typical KB. I'm preparing to do a large-scale
> content audit for our company, which will include the KB, and I'll be
> looking at (among other things) the views. I'd like to have something to
> compare it to--some sort of "normal" standard.
>
> Any ideas? I've Googled a bit but am not finding anything, and I'm hoping
> I'm just looking in the wrong places. Thanks!
>
> Nina
>
>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Visit TechWhirl for the latest on content technology, content strategy and content development | https://techwhirl.com

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- 

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com


Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources and info.

Looking for articles on Technical Communications?  Head over to our online magazine at http://techwhirl.com

Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions?  Search our public email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives