Late last year, MindManager launched version 24 of its popular mind mapping tool with something new called App Studio. But little was published about it until Alludo held a webinar with App Studio’s developer, Nick Duffill.
His presentation was very informative about how this new toolset can be used. But I still had many questions about it: Why was it created? Who is it for? How does it fit into the needs of today’s workers? And what resources are available to help MindManager users who may be thinking about packaging their knowledge in an app.
So I interviewed Nick. His insights, as always, were clear and profound. The bottom line is that App Studio empowers users to create a broad array of tools and resources far beyond what MindManager’s developer could ever accommodate in its software application.
Chuck Frey: What was the genesis of App Studio for MindManager? What drove the decision to offer it as a set of tools that users can employ to build their own customized applications on top of the MindManager environment?
Nick Duffill: About four years ago I was asked to create an Add-in for MindManager to implement a number of special data processing features. The processing itself was to be done with macros (written by someone else), and the Add-in was needed in order to create a new ribbon tab and buttons.
From an early stage it was clear that there would be many changes as the project evolved, so the Add-in was designed to be configurable and flexible, so that new ideas could be turned around quickly. I used it on a couple of other projects and added more features, and eventually it became App Studio.
Frey: Simply put, what does App Studio enable MindManager users to do?
Duffill: App Studio lets users add custom features and content to MindManager for Windows, often without any programming. You can add a new ribbon tab with buttons, or a new command to a context menu, or install templates and map parts just by editing a configuration map in MindManager.
This means you can put the resources you need for a particular type of work directly into MindManager, where they are only a click away, organized in a way that makes sense for that task. This customization can then be packaged into a “MindManager App” and shared in a MindManager map.
Other users can add your tools and materials to their MindManager client in a couple of clicks, without needing any administrator privileges. In this way, MindManager migrates from being a general-purpose tool into a workspace for a defined and supported business process.
Frey: How are the needs of knowledge workers evolving and how can apps help them be more productive and creative?
Duffill: Good question. I need to take a step back to answer that. The application of technology to knowledge sharing often reinforces the notion that information and knowledge are equivalent, and can be written down. Generative AI is accelerating this. Most people avoid the idea that real skills are based on tacit knowledge, which by definition is knowledge that cannot be written in words. You can’t learn to swim by reading a book. There is an old adage that in theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice they are not. Lasting learning comes from doing things.
I don’t think it is a question of the needs of knowledge workers changing, but that the solutions designed to “help” them are pushing people towards instant answers and high volumes of data and information, i.e. into the arms of the information gatekeepers. This may not be a strategic thing to do. We are being trained to accept that there is an official reference description and perspective on almost any subject, whereas our relationship with and interpretation of information is where knowledge is formed.
I read an article recently by someone who claimed that generative AI meant he could be an expert in any subject that he liked. Either I missed some heavy irony, or people are genuinely starting to think like that. Learning skills are being neglected in the rush for “productivity” and instant results. This is what Iain McGilchrist means by the increasing dominance of left-hemisphere thinking.
Personally, I would like to see less emphasis on productivity and creativity, and more emphasis on learning and competence; not that productivity and creativity are unimportant, but they are built on deeper foundations, not on a hack.
At a technical level, MindManager is a powerful tool for managing information, as are many other mind mapping tools. But the personal or shared process of building, manipulating, and negotiating ideas is where the value is created. The difference between a read-only resource in a knowledge base and an App in MindManager is that the former tells you the theory, while the latter gives you a focused workspace for you to play with.
Apps should deliver not only static descriptions, but materials you can experiment with yourself, and form your own opinions from experience. As an example, a knowledge base article might tell you the theory and protocol of risk assessment. An App would give you resources that you can modify, add your own ideas, apply to real situations, and decide what worked and what didn’t. You will only find out what really matters when you start doing this and start a process of continuous improvement.
Frey: In an email to me you expressed what the real role of apps in the mind map environment is: “Although Apps look like a technical feature on the surface, the real opportunity is in helping people to express how and why they use map visualization, and how they can transfer their expertise to others in the form of resources and tools.” Can you explain what you mean by that?
Duffill: An App enables a “subject expert” to share their approach with other MindManager users, by transferring examples, templates, tutorial materials and guidance. By “subject expert” I mean someone who has experience of applying MindManager to a specific business process, i.e. they know their specialist subject, and they know how to leverage MindManager’s features to deliver results.
Typically, it is hard to share this knowledge, and MindManager experts are at risk of working in isolation. I once heard someone describe MindManager as a “secret sauce” that enabled high performance, but nobody else knew why or how.
The author of an App should think about how to explain their approach and methods so that other people can copy them and learn by doing. There is also a second-order effect at play here. A very effective way to improve your maps and technique is to constantly think about how you will explain it to others; what assumptions you are making and how you would explain them. Working in public is a different mindset. In the same way that the value from mind mapping comes from the process, developing materials for others is a valuable process for the author and is the foundation for continuous improvement.
Frey: I’ve recognized for a very long time that mind maps tend to be hard to share, for others to adequately understand how to use them. It kind of sounds like App Studio packages everything up neatly to make that process easier. Is that an accurate assessment?
Duffill: Yes, provided the App author also makes an effort to make their maps easier to understand. The process of creating an App for someone else is the driver for this, as mentioned earlier. The hardest part of making a map clear to others is distinguishing between the mental model in your head, and what has actually made it onto the paper. Other people cannot see inside your head – they can only read the words.
By definition, a mind map is a set of notes, using summaries and keywords, with little explanation of relationships or purpose, because these things are clear to you. They take a lot more effort to make them explicit. You have to start where the reader is, not where you are.
An App in MindManager meets the user halfway by giving them a workspace where they can restructure and apply their own ideas, and act on the information you provide. See also the note about K-Maps below.
Frey: In your App Studio webinar for MindManager, you describe it as a “long tail” tool that supports an incredible diversity of highly specialized use cases. Why do you think MindManager evolved in that way and what types of challenges does that create?
Duffill: It is the market that is “long tail”, made up of hundreds or thousands of individual use cases. MindManager can be applied in many different ways, but to position it as a product for sale, you have to say “what it does”. The answer “almost anything you like” is unconvincing, so vendors focus on the most common use cases – brainstorming, note taking, meeting management, project management and so on.
In reality, once the user has experienced the benefits themselves, they move to using it in a way that suits them. They discover their own use cases, and it is not long before they really miss some feature that is important to them. I think the MindManager Community Forum has collected around 400 suggestions over the last couple of years. Individually they are all important to the user, but taken together they don’t merge into a single clear direction, reflecting the long tail nature of the market.
It is not realistic to imagine that the core product could accommodate every possible request in every vertical application. However, many (but not all) of these could potentially be in-house Apps, where there are enough users to justify their creation. Apps provide a way for MindManager to become a tool for a specialized segment or organization, which could never be a volume product in its own right. Apps have been designed to be cost effective for small teams upwards and cost a lot less to create than a public product.
Building solutions
Frey: Who do you envision building apps? Consultants? Team leaders within corporations? Other use cases?
Duffill: Both of these are good use cases, because Apps add the most value when they are designed for a business process in a company or set of clients.
Apps can be built in a number of ways. Content-only Apps that do not require any coding can be created by any MindManager for Windows user. If custom coding is needed to implement a special function like a special import or export, this can be done either by an advanced MindManager user, or an independent developer.
Many organizations with multiple users have a small team of expert users and a larger constituency of more casual users. One way to transfer expertise with an App is to have the first version of an App commissioned, then for the users themselves to take over ongoing improvements and updates. Continuous improvement is a central theme; the best way to discover what is the most useful is to make a start and get feedback to improve the outcomes.
Frey: What kind of support are you providing to people who are trying to build their own apps?
Duffill: Apps can be used by any MindManager user, but to develop Apps you need a developer license key for App Studio, available via Olympic Limited at https://www.olympic-limited.co.uk/app-studio-for-mindmanager-Windows. App Studio is a set of tools inside MindManager for building Apps. It is installed in MindManager 24 by default, but is not enabled without a separate developer license key.
App Studio is also available as an Add-in for other versions of MindManager for Windows. App development is done inside MindManager and no other software is necessary, but it is useful to have a source of images for custom buttons and icons. Currently it ships with the App Studio developer guide. An “App Studio Extension Pack” which adds some more features and content for App developers is also available, and support can be accessed via the App Studio forum on the Olympic Web site. App development Webinars are being planned. Online videos currently include:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LtPH40Zy9g
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdO-54MR–Q
And a video from a recent MindManager webinar:
Frey: Do you envision most of these apps being private or public – or some combination of the two?
Duffill: Most Apps will be private, because they will be aligned to the exact needs of a team or organization. There are some public Apps which demonstrate the capabilities of Apps or add a few generic features. But to make Apps cost-effective and quick to create, some compromises have been made which make them less suitable for products where the IP must be protected. If the protection of IP in a public space is critical, a MindManager Add-in would be more suitable, but at a higher initial development cost.
Frey: I saw during the App Studio MindManager webinar that a license to create apps comes with a developer’s map with a lot of resources to help people who may want to try their hand at building an app. What are some of the resources it contains?
Duffill: The developer documentation contains tutorials that you can follow to create an App and publish App Sharing maps, and detailed reference information for all of App Studio’s functions. The App Studio Extension Pack also contains some partly populated templates that can be used to start an App.
Once you get started, it is quick to incrementally improve and extend an App. You just edit a MindManager map and click “Rebuild”. You don’t need to spend a long time carefully designing an App in advance – the process is designed to be iterative and incremental.
Frey: I find it quite interesting that many of the apps can be used as a framework that can be modified and repurposed. What resources are available to help people learn how to do that?
One of the trade-offs of making Apps quick to create is that the configuration and content of an App is relatively open. If you have added an App from someone else, you can access the files that it is built from and repurpose them. The developer can also choose whether or not to share the App configuration map; if they do, you can copy, modify and rebuild their App, subject to the license terms. This is one of the reasons that Apps were not designed for commercial products; their openness makes them more suited for adaptation and re-use inside an organisation, or between a consultant and their clients.
It is important that ideas and fragments of Apps can be re-used easily and quickly. The “Knowledge Base Demo” App, available on the MindManager web site, is both a working App and a framework that can be adapted and extended to apply it to a specific discipline. The basic structure of a Knowledge Base is divided into four areas: knowledge maps, templated materials, specialist tools, and help & support. These can all be tailored for the subject of the knowledge base and the organisation. You can download and add this App, dismantle it to see how it works, then rebuild it to your own requirements.
Frey: Is there an online community that’s focused on the needs of app developers and helping new people when they get stuck?
Duffill: There is an Apps category on the MindManager community forum at https://community.mindmanager.com/ and a MindManager Apps bulletin board at https://www.appstudio4mindmanager.org/ which is hosted by Olympic Limited.
Frey: Where can readers of my blog find apps? I know there are some on the MindManager website, but it sounds like there may be more scattered around the web.
Duffill: At the moment there are some public Apps on the MindManager website.
There are also some public Apps on the Olympic website.
Some people are publishing their own Apps, e.g. Werner Dolata’s AI App.
With the right App developer license, an App can easily be shared by simply publishing its App Sharing Map using the MindManager publishing feature. This lets users read something about the App before downloading it as a MindManager map. There are plans to make Apps available in other places too.
Frey: What’s next for App Studio?
Duffill: The main area of development is in the design of Apps. Technical improvements to App Studio will flow from the demands of Apps. In particular, the design of K-Maps (Knowledge Maps) is an area which would offer benefits beyond MindManager Apps.
There is not much consensus on how to present and transfer knowledge with maps. To most users it seems to be too obvious to merit much discussion, but one of the principles of creating an App for a small or closed community is that you can get continuous feedback and make continuous improvements. A global standard for K-Maps is not needed. It just needs to be understood by and meet the needs of the local stakeholders, and just like mind mapping, it is the process of improving Apps and maps where value is created.
Leave a Reply