How do you "make people" use your new taxonomy?

This is one of the more common questions I'm asked regarding the use of taxonomies and organizational change.  This is, of course, the wrong question.  Say what you want about users, they are actually very wise.  The average person in a cube has too much work to do in too short a time.  Their income, self-esteem, and free time all depend on their ability to work the system to get their tasks done well and quickly.  If your SharePoint implementation, taxonomy model, and governance plan make their lives one iota more difficult then they will find a way around you.  They will have to, won't they?

One workshop participant recently said "What do we care about the user's needs?  If they want to work here they will do what we tell them to do!"  Thankfully he was joking, but this has been the attitude of IT for many years.

SharePoint is intended to be the most democratic of tools.  The power to create workflows, sites, libraries, navigational structures, groups, and other technology solutions is actually placed in the hands of the end user!  Taxonomies managed by a governance team are the only thing standing between this SharePoint democracy and total anarchy.

The ideal result of a collaborative governance model is to provide

1. Strategic Framework. Create a strategic framework of definitions (taxonomy) and policies, that provide a strong strategic framework to keep the company organized
2. Tactical Freedom. Provide tactical freedom for the end users as they work within the strategic framework. 
3. Just enough governance.  Just the right amount of governance support at the right time.
4. Federated governance.  Federate the taxonomy and policy governance team with other established governance teams that already exist within the organization.
5. Rapid response.  The governance team must be accessible and able to make a decision immediately.
6. Small governance team.  The governance team is chaired by IT but is "for the users, by the users, and of the users. "  The governance team should be made up of business stakeholders from across the organization with one or two IT representatives.  The default answer should be "yes."
7. Recognition for excellence.  SharePoint provides the opportunity for the end user to innovate and create without running the risk of causing trouble for someone else.  Governance should always be on the lookout for grassroots excellence and promote it.  If someone comes up with their own project management team site template, and other project managers like it and use it, make it a standard template.  Give the originator tons of credit and a gift certificate for dinner.  Governance hunts for excellence and promotes it.  Governance does not boss people around any more than is absolutely necessary!

What the end user needs is

1. Creative freedom. The end user needs to be agile in using and adapting technologies to get their job done as quickly and effectively as possible. 
2. Operational safety.  They need to know that if they use the tools under normal circumstances they are protected by a larger strategic framework.  In other words, they don't have to beg permission to do their jobs but they also don't have to worry that they will accidentally transmit sensitive information to the wrong people.
3. Least resistance.  The end user needs the governance team to provide policies, tools and best practices that make good common sense.  These solutions should also be the easiest, fastest and most effective choice.  People will make the easiest choice that makes sense to them.
4. No delay.  Any decisions from governance should be available immediately.  Since it is not usually easy to get representatives to attend a meeting on short notice, the balance of governance decisions should be made using asynchronous collaboration means (i.e. a SharePoint team site).
5. To be heard.  The end user needs to know that governance doesn't exist to box them in, but to listen to them and make sure they have what they need.
6. Representation.  You'll find that your end user community will take much stronger ownership of SharePoint if the governance team is composed of their peers.  I recommend a staggered six-month rotation schedule (every six months rotate 1/3 of the members out and new ones in).  This provides for continuity, fresh thinking, and helps to indoctrinate as many people as possible.
7. Training.  The biggest cause of new technology failure isn't hardware or software, but peopleware.  If you don't show people how to effectively use a new technology, how will they know?  At the same time, flexible and non-linear tools like SharePoint are like chess. You can learn the basic moves to chess in an hour, but you will spend the rest of your life improving your game.  The same holds true for SharePoint.  You will learn the basic moves rather quickly but then continually improve your game.  The role of governance is to identify, prove and promote the best chess players.

The answer to the question - "How do you "make people" use your new taxonomy?"  You don't.  If people won't use your taxonomy, then your taxonomy is too big, too small, doesn't make sense, or is unusable for one of a thousand other reasons.  You can waste your time and theirs by trying to enforce the taxonomy, or you can work with your users to find out what would make sense.   What would they buy into and support.

This is what my workshop does.  I work with you and key representatives of your user community to develop a taxonomy and governance model that does make sense to them.  They will use it because they helped create it.  They own it because they believe in it.  It makes sense to all concerned because everyone must agree to it.  It fits the best practices for taxonomies because the workshop includes processes to prove and validate the taxonomy.

So, if folks won't use your taxonomy then the problem is yours, not theirs!