Skip to main content

Over in the Products Tips and Tricks @Danyel posted an interesting question about channels vs catalogs and that got me thinking about channels.  

We love channels. We love channels so much, I think we have too many channels.:thinking: It’s overwhelming. And my team is always saying can we have channel for this and a channel for that and of course the answer is yes! So we make more channels. Having said that, I also would say that we don’t really have any unnecessary channels that are just fluff or redundant so I just need to find a better way of serving them up to the users without them having to scroll and scroll and scroll and end up getting overwhelmed. I don’t know maybe it’s not a problem for most people. Aren’t we all used to doing that anyway with our own TV channels and streaming services every day? I’d definitely be interested in hearing if anyone else has that feeling or has a great solution for keeping all their content organized. 

We struggle with channels a bit and also have quite a lot of them. In our case, the issue is that there’s no option to create sub-channels or folders within them. The fact that you cannot search for a specific channel using its name doesn’t really help. You can only search for an asset. TIP 1: A workaround here would be creating a custom HTML page with special buttons that redirect you to other pages with specific channels (e.g. in similar categories or for same departments).

Assets, on the other hand, are never organized. TIP 2: If you want them to appear in a speciifc order, you either have to sort them alphabetically and name all assets starting with numbers or sort them by newest and upload in a specific order.

All in all, I think it doesn’t work that great especially in bigger organisations where every single project wants to have their own channel. I don’t want to sound too negative but I think it’s a bit of a wasted potential and requires lots of workarounds to work properly. That said, some improvements should be fairly easy to implement so I hope it will be taken care of in the future :slight_smile: ​​​​​​​


We also have a lot of channels to manage, only because we need to have a separate channel for each language. So one topic/category turns out to needing 13 different channels, one for each language. We assign the channels just like the course catalogs, to each users preferred language. It’s very time consuming from an admin side. 


Thanks @abartunek  for the tips. I am contemplating some page redesign and definitely thought about using custom content widgets to link to “like” channels. I really like the way you’ve created custom “buttons” for your menu items and maybe something like that would also work. Thanks by the way for sharing your html over in...

I’m going to play around with that and see how it might help us. We also have the need for more options for sorting assets in a channel. There are several suggestions over in the Ideas Portal so for those of you also needing this, go on over and vote. Like you said, it’s probably rather easy to implement so I’m also hoping we see it in a future update. 


Our organization is still trying to find a way to enable searching within a PDF document in a channel.  Tags only work for identifying which document has that topic, but we need the search to identify if sub topics or specific words in the document.  Docebo said this was on their roadmap and 2 years later, still waiting.

If anyone has found a way to have global search within a document, please pass on your solution.

Thanks,

Cheryl


Just adding a +1

I think creating custom folders (or something similar) at the channel level would be FANTASTIC! Admins could create a content organization structure that works for the specific content contained within that channel. Learners could see this and sort as needed. I feel like any work in this area could be transformational with how Docebo clients effectively manage collections of content, and customize based off their specific use case. 

PS - Also:

Improve “local” search (at the channel and catalog level)


Reply