As a simplification of the above, I note these particulars about my org:
A service has a 2-5 letter prefix already associated with the hosts. Some people already refer to the service by this prefix instead of its name. I hate that. But I could use that for the service.
Like so:
4.ROU.02 Architecture
4.IDX.04 Operational Dashboards
I think I prefer the service name, though:
4.Router.02 Architecture
4.Index.04 Operational Dashboards
CON Neither roll off the tongue like vanilla J.D. 42.02 Architecture
CON An extra level of hierarchy that isn’t really needed
A team already has a one-word name; why associate it with a random three-letter code?
5.Maple.01 Operations Dashboards
Same problems as for the service about rolling tongues and hierarchy.
Alternative 2
Each area specifies how many digits are allowed for categories
1X Health and Career/
2X Customer Contact/
3XXX Campaigns and Projects/
└── 3-X29 Scaling for Customer X/
└── 3-X29.02 Design
4XX Service Documentation/
└── 405 Index/
└── 405.02 Architecture
5XX Team Documentation/
└── 511 Tower/
└── 511.02 New Hire Guide
6X Planning/
PRO flattens the hierarchy and gets rid of the three-letter pneumonic for services and teams. I don’t think those are needed. They probably are needed for projects, though.
CON The Librarian will have to fight entropy to keep the smaller areas from gaining un-needed digits. Hopefully having 7-9 open will help.
I prefer the first version. Something about those + pluses that I quite like, can’t put my finger on it. Maybe it keeps the mathematical nature of the ‘original’ JD? Either way.
So is this a system that just you will be using, or will this be a shared company thing?
And presumably these 3-letter codes already exist? And are consistent across your 30s and 40s and so on?
I’d still like to see how this looked with those 3-letter IDs up at the top level, textbook PRO.AC.ID style…
So is this a system that just you will be using, or will this be a shared company thing?
My company’s shared files are a mess. I want to clean it up for everyone.
And presumably these 3-letter codes already exist? And are consistent across your 30 s and 40 s and so on?
Only the 40s (services) have a semi-standard code, not the 30s (projects) or 50s (teams).
I’d still like to see how this looked with those 3-letter IDs up at the top level, textbook PRO.AC.ID style…
I have a few issues I am trying to resolve with this idea:
Where do I organize those for the entire org? I had them embedded into the structure, otherwise I’m afraid it will turn into a 4-level deep structure.
I figured each individual should be in charge of adding 3-letter-code/3-level-hierarchy to their own systems, and not have that dictated by the company.
D01.13.01 (link) says in bold: You should only use multiple projects if they are absolutely required.
I do like the original the best. I think a small tweak makes it better: Make the prefixes for projects, teams, etc the full two digits. For example, everything under 30 Campaigns and Projects has the pattern 30+XYZ so a file looks like 30+X29.02 Design.
And your posts are formatted so nicely also! I’m presuming that’s just a code block where you’ve pasted your organisation? Did you use the online tree maker to make it?
I would like to share my system, but I need to go through it and anonymise it all. That’s probably a 30 min job, but I’ve gone for two projects. Folder 1A for admin, and 1P for Projects. The 1 is just to keep it up the top of the alphabet. After that I think it’s pretty vanilla J.D.
