The Transportation Research Thesaurus: Capabilities and Enhancements (2018)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

45 As an extension of the assessment of the TRT, NCHRP Project 20-109 included an assess- ment of TMS tools. During the assessment of future opportunities for the TRT, it became appar- ent that the known requirements are focused on maintaining the status quo (Use Case 0) and enabling the ISO-compliant TRT (Use Case 1), which is foundational for all other use cases. In addition, Use Case 1 addresses the need for improved dissemination of the TRT to the screen, in print, and as exportable files to encourage and enhance use of the TRT. Therefore, Use Case 1 was used as the practical benchmark for the tool assessment. Research Approach The research team identified commercial and open source TMS products based on the expertise of team members and a search of the literature. The list of 52 products was reduced to a working list of 11 based on whether the software had recently been updated, whether its web site looked to be active, and whether it met the basic criteria of ISO compliance. Enhancement to the current TMS was also included as an option. Following a review of all the assessment criteria, it was determined that all criteria required for the business requirements for the TMS could be taken from Dimension E (Thesaurus Archi- tecture). This resulted in 48 business requirements (see Appendix C). The team then used its knowledge of ISO compliance, the information from the TRT assessment, and interviews with TRT management and staff to assign tentative mandatory/optional weights to each business requirement. In the actual evaluation, the mandatory and optional designations were replaced with a 2 or a 1, respectively, in the “Importance” column in order to calculate a weighted score for each requirement. Those products that met the requirement were given a score of 2. Those that could not meet the requirement were given a score of 0. In this assessment, the research team did not score those that partially met a requirement, but this could be done in the future. The research team was unable to evaluate all requirements using the available sources. In those cases, no score was given for the requirement for that product. The 12 TMS options were then evaluated against the business requirements. Information was gathered based on vendor web sites, documentation, literature reviews, the expertise of team members, and vendor contacts. The assessment of the current TMS was based on inter- views with the development contractor and TRT management and on access to the system. Scores were then calculated based on the weight (mandatory or optional) of the requirements multiplied by the score given to each product. In addition to evaluating the 12 options based on the business requirements, the team gath- ered information concerning non-functional factors such as the estimated cost (both initial and recurring), learning curve, staffing requirements, hardware/operating system environment, C h a p t e r 5 Assessment of Thesaurus Management Software

46 the transportation research thesaurus: Capabilities and enhancements and licensing options and terms. Whenever possible, the team reviewed demonstrations or documentation of the software to gather sample screenshots to show the diversity of the interface look and feel and navigation across the products. It should be noted that this was a market assessment and was not data collection for a pro- curement. Once a strategic direction is set and procurement activities begin, it will be possible to eliminate much of the uncertainty in this market assessment. The research team suggests that all requirements, as well as additional questions related to the non-functional factors, be provided to the vendors to complete as part of the procurement process. Findings Because an ISO-compliant thesaurus is foundational to TRT enhancement and to imple- mentation of other future TRT strategies, as represented by the use cases, the products on the working list were filtered to include only those products that are ISO compliant with respect to the relationships that are supported; only the current TMS is not fully ISO compliant. ISO compliance is an overarching requirement for enhancing the TRT since it sets the stage not only for rectifying some of the current gaps in the TRT’s capabilities but also is a requirement for any enhancements and advanced use cases, including Use Case 1 and beyond. ISO compliance brings with it a number of functional requirements around the standard relationships that are met by most products. The current system can perform some of these functions, although it is not fully ISO compliant. Despite the lack of complete information about many of the products, all open source and commercial products rated significantly higher than the current TMS, even if enhancements were made to the current TMS where possible. All commercial products evaluated are ISO com- pliant to the extent that they support the standard ISO 25964 relationships; only the current TMS is not fully ISO compliant. Gaps in the current TMS include not only the lack of standard relationing, but also the lack of a variety of reporting capabilities and a general reliance on the system developer to produce these reports. All open source or commercial products have some level of reporting capability— either to the screen, in print, or both—with the function in the hands of the thesaurus manager or other non-developer roles. Another gap involves the lack of embedded workflow/governance processes. These exist in the current TRT environment, but they are external to the TMS. Workflow/governance pro- cesses are closely related to a number of the requirements. For example, products have statuses that can be used to control workflow, support additional governance and review-related note fields, permit various levels of access, and generate reports that may be used in the workflow and governance processes. Open source or commercial products have more or less formal workflow capabilities. If the TRT community desires to change, formalize, or more highly structure the current governance process, this may be an area of differentiation among the products. Beyond the compliance requirements, the differentiators among the commercial products were found to be primarily the non-functional requirements such as cost (including recurring costs), staffing, training, and licensing. The initial costs for the products on the working list vary widely—from freeware to $295 for a single user/desktop version to $129,000 for a perpetual license with 50 users. All on-premise versions of software have options for perpetual licensing. This is distinguished from recurrent licenses, which come at a lower initial cost but with higher annual payments. The perpetual licenses usually include recurring maintenance, update, or support costs that are paid annually

assessment of thesaurus Management Software 47 for the following year. The distinctions that drive differences in cost are desktop versus net- work versions and the number of thesaurus manager “seats” or simultaneous accesses. Other factors may contribute to the final cost including the particular server environment and any customization or technical support required for installation, which is not included in the license. For example, migrating the current TRT content might be a cost factor if the cur- rent ISO-compliant master version created for the TRT assessment is not usable. Options for cloud-based TMS as a service are becoming available. While this option eliminates some installation and maintenance costs, hosting concerns, and system administration, it must be reviewed carefully for budget impacts, alignment with desired growth strategies against the use cases, and licensing constraints. The relatively inexpensive, single-user, desktop products may be viable alternatives, par- ticularly for Use Case 1, where there is limited integration with other systems or users. This initial small-scale implementation, or “convenience copy” would allow staff to learn about the structure and function of an ISO-compliant TMS and to perform some of the initial clean-up of the TRT content. It would be feasible to start with the “convenience copy” and grow into the higher-end products when needed. This decision requires an assessment of the degree to which the TMS would be integrated with external governance processes, such as reviews by the TRT Subcommittee or SMEs. The more distributed the involvement, the more likely the TRT is to need a network/web-based TMS or at least some way to publish updates or extracts of the TRT to the web for review. High-end products have many features that can take a significant amount of time to learn. However, these products can also be used in very low-level approaches to perform the majority of the tasks that are needed while providing the ability to grow into more complex TRT func- tionality in the future. The level of staff expertise and training would depend on what functional- ity is to be exploited and how the TRT is to be used. While two products may receive the same score for a particular requirement, there can be differences in the way the products implement the requirement. The most desirable imple- mentation (especially look and feel) may depend on the characteristics of the TRT content (as outlined in Dimension A, Thesaurus Content), the roadmap for TRT content enhancement, and workflow and governance approaches. Therefore, demonstrations by the vendors, prefer- ably including sample TRT data, are suggested as part of any procurement strategy. Many of the decisions regarding the TMS will be subjective, having to do with the look and feel of various TMS products and their usability. Therefore, the research team encourages those who will be using the products under consideration to participate in demonstrations, take advantage of trial versions, and attend the webinars often hosted by the vendors. Purchase of one or more copies of an inexpensive desktop, single-user product as a “convenience copy” is suggested as a way to learn more about the ISO-compliant data model and the functionality of a compliant tool and to fine-tune the requirements. Conclusions As a result of the TMS assessment against criteria and comparison of additional context from the use cases, the research team offers the following general conclusions regarding the selection of a TMS. Final decisions about the appropriate TMS are closely linked to the strategic decisions regard- ing the future of the TRT as represented by the use cases. If Use Case 1 is the desired approach, the next step is to review the optional requirements to determine which ones the TRT Subcommittee

48 the transportation research thesaurus: Capabilities and enhancements and the TRT staff consider to be mandatory. Even if the initial focus is on Use Case 1, the TMS selection can be made with an eye to the more advanced use case scenarios, since Use Case 2 requirements are met by the majority of the TMS products on the working list. Non-functional factors such as initial and recurring costs, technical platform, staffing, licens- ing, usability, and training will be major factors in the final decision process and are closely tied to the strategic direction. If the decision is to move more in the strategic direction represented by Use Cases 2 through 4, it will be important to identify additional requirements to support the required functional- ity. Each forward-looking use case brings additional requirements or modifications to current requirements as well as new opportunities for the TRT.