In all of my years of in the knowledge, content and records management space, I've run across some pretty elegant implementations and some pretty bad ones.  These days, a lot of my clients are the ones who need help recovering from the latter.  One of the issues is that, while we call it Enterprise Content Management (ECM), the "enterprise" aspect is clearly lacking with most implementations.  Traditionally, ECM systems have been quite costly and difficult to implement.  As a result, most ECM solutions were either departmental or, in most cases, just point solutions such as image enabled Accounts Payable.  While these systems may have met the needs of the single department, they did not scale to the rest of the enterprise very well.  To make things worse, in many companies, each department often implemented their own unique system to ensure control of their content leading to numerous isolated silos of content and no cohesive information management strategy. 

Findings in a 2008 AIIM  report  titled "Findability: The Art and Science of Making Content Easy to Find," noted that 69% of respondents believe that less than 50% of their organization's information was searchable online.  My guess is that the number would actually fall well below that 50% number.  Unfortunately, many employees don't know where to find the information they need.  What's worse, those that do know where it resides often simply don't have the access.  There are a number of reasons for this:

• Each disparate content system has its own unique information architecture
• Each system likely has its own search engine, not linked to any other system
• Each system had its own security model with different levels of security for different components of the system

Enter SharePoint
In part because of the cost of ECM systems, and in part because of their difficulty to deploy, many companies have turned to Microsoft's SharePoint.  A relatively low cost solution which is easily deployed, and perhaps too easily.  At last, departments could have quick and easy access to content repositories the problem was solved...right?  Well, not so fast.  Many companies that decided to replace their ECM systems with SharePoint discovered that the functionality just wasn't yet there for what they needed.  Now, instead of replacing the ECM system, they're needing to augment that system.  Instead of solving the problem, what many of these companies have done is compound it.  A new, unique information architecture and a new information governance headache that is widely documented by IT organizations around the world.  How do we alleviate this headache?

Putting the "Enterprise" back in ECM
One thing we do know is that companies will continue to deploy ECM solutions, including SharePoint, at the departmental level.  It's always important to control the deployments to ensure success.  Before the deployments begin though, some strategic planning will go a long way.  Lack of planning surely leads to chaos.

1)  Scalability:  When it comes to sizing the system for growth, most vendors will have benchmarks to help you determine the system elements you'll need to scale to the enterprise.  That includes elements such as the amount of disk, the network throughput, server specifications and the like.  A good Systems Architect will help determine the requirements.  Planning for growth at the beginning will prevent costly upgrades later.  This is one area that most companies do reasonably well.

2)  Design the foundation:  One would never build a house without a good blueprint, but for some reason, ECM systems aren't treated the same way.  The best thing one can do is to truly understand how the content will be utilized within the company.  It is critical to understand how users expect to interface with the content.  All too often, ECM Requests for Proposal are nothing more than feature wish lists without a clear understanding of how the information will be used.  Before the deployment begins, it is important to have a solid information architecture defined which incorporates the records management requirements, search and browse requirements, taxonomies and metadata standards.  If available, use existing information discovery tools and Master Data Management (MDM), efforts to assist in the information architecture design.  Also, be sure to include the records organization as well as impacted departments in the design process.

3)  Readiness Assessment:  Before deploying the system, it's important to have a deployment roadmap.  Which departments are the most likely candidates for the initial deployment?  Is the records retention policy complete for all departments?  Which departments have a strong understanding of how the information is accessed and utilized?  Which departments have a strong understanding of the technology?  Are there other projects that could impact any particular group's involvement?  There's plenty to consider when determining any department's readiness, but it will help with setting expectations and ensuring a quick win with the first group.

In the coming weeks, I'll be blogging on each of these topics in further detail.  If you need more information on any of these areas, feel free to give us a call.

Best regards,
Michael Elkins