Redesigning a broken content governance process
The Problem
When I joined Fidium, a governance framework existed on paper but nobody was following it. Content had blanket three-month expiration dates regardless of how stable or volatile it actually was. Stakeholders were flooded with review notifications every week and had started ignoring them entirely. The governance process had created its own noise problem, and the result was outdated content, disengaged owners, and no structured review process.
What I Did
I knew I couldn't replace one rigid system with another. Knowledge management is the knowledge manager's top priority but it's rarely anyone else's. If I wanted real participation, the system had to work around the stakeholder's goals.
I started by removing expiration dates to stop the notification flood (this bought be some goodwill). Then I held 1:1s with each stakeholder, not to explain governance, but to understand their goals. What I learned shaped my strategy. Product wanted reps reading their announcements, so I built a process to integrate product changes into existing content and helped launch an internal newsletter. Marketing wanted their materials reaching prospects, so I trained sales on sending content directly from Highspot and helped improve the copy.
In place of blanket expiration dates, I built a quarterly review process driven by data, pulling engagement metrics and focusing reviews on the highest-viewed content and anything with zero views. Reviews became short, focused, and relevant instead of a blanket obligation.
The Result
Quarterly review participation went from near zero to roughly 50% within a couple of months. But the result I was most proud of was a behavioral shift: stakeholders started reaching out proactively. Instead of me chasing people down after a product change, I started getting emails saying 'something new is coming, what do we need to update?' That told me the governance model had stopped feeling like a burden and started feeling like something that helped stakeholders do their jobs better. That's what good KM governance actually looks like.