How often is the information updated?

How often does each type of source publish?

The useful frequency of a watch is set, first of all, by the rhythm of each source. Reviewing more often than a source publishes adds nothing; reviewing less delays the signal. Some reference rhythms, according to the bodies themselves:

Why are capture, review and reading not the same thing?

1. Capture. Innguma’s monitoring is continuous. Its aim is for no relevant publication to be left out.
2. Review. The team reviews and validates, in Factory, the space where Innguma processes and structures signals, what the AI has filtered, grouped and classified.
3. Reading. Each recipient receives information in the format and with the frequency they need, through newsletters sent from the Library, or by consulting it when they need to.

UNE 166006:2018 describes watching as a set of distinct activities, from search and processing through to value-adding, distribution and storage, which each organisation defines for each product^[6]. Each activity can have its own rhythm: capturing daily does not oblige you to send a daily newsletter.

How do you choose the rhythm for each area?

One question helps: what would this area lose if it learnt of something a week later? If the answer is ‘a deadline or an opportunity’, it needs frequent review; if it is ‘little’, a periodic newsletter is enough.

• Tenders and calls: the value depends on the submission deadline. They call for daily review and an alert to whoever is preparing the bid.
• Regulation: publication in the gazette opens entry-into-force and adaptation deadlines. A daily review of the gazette and a weekly summary for those who do not manage compliance are usually enough.
• Competitors: sporadic but high-impact moves. Frequent review and a weekly or fortnightly newsletter.
• State of the art: patents and scientific publications change slowly. A monthly newsletter with analysis adds more than a daily one without it.

Does more frequency mean being better informed?

• No. Receiving things more often is not the same as knowing more; past a certain point, newsletters stop being opened.
• Confusing capture with reading leads to sending newsletters at the cadence of the fastest source, rather than at the cadence of the reader.
• One rhythm for every area overwhelms some and arrives too late for others.
• Without a history, frequency is the only defence. If what has been validated is kept and can be consulted, not everything has to be read at the moment it appears.

How is it configured in Innguma?

Monitoring is continuous for all the sources of the watch. Which sources are reviewed with higher priority, how often each newsletter is sent and who receives it are defined with each organisation during set-up, and adjusted in use. Newsletters can include summaries generated by AI, and everything validated stays in the Library, to be consulted when needed.