Practical Considerations for Implementing Enterprise Content Management (ECM)Thursday, October 1, 2009 10:00 AM - 11:00 AM BSTDoug Miles, AIIM and Nic Archer, Vamosa

Agenda

10.00Welcome, Ceri Jones, VP Marketing, Vamosa10.05 ‘Enterprise Content Management – who’s achieved it, how are they doing it and what are the issues’ , Doug Miles, MD, AIIM10.35 ‘The Big Challenge – How to deal with the digital landfill’ , Nic Archer, SVP Products Vamosa10.55Q&A11.00Close

Ceri Jones – Vice President of Marketing

Welcome

Introduction to Vamosa

Software solutions company focused on Enterprise Content Governance (ECoG)Fortune 500 customer baseOffices in New York, Boston, London and GlasgowExtensive experience of multinational clients with complex content environmentsSolutions to analyze, enhance, standardize, monitor and maintain all forms of business contentKey migration partner for Vignette, Interwoven, IBM, Oracle, Day Software, Microsoft

Doug Miles, MD AIIM

Doug Miles has been with AIIM since January 2005, taking over in  March 2006 as UK Managing Director. He has over 25 years experience of working with users and vendors across a broad spectrum of IT applications. An early pioneer of document management systems, Doug has been involved in their evolution from technical solution, through business process optimisation to the current enterprise-wide adoption. Most recently, Doug has produced a number of survey reports on user issues and drivers for ECM, Email Management, Records Management and Enterprise 2.0. Doug has also worked closely with other enterprise-level IT systems such as ERP and CRM. Doug has an MSc in Communications Engineering and is an MIEE.

Doug is a regular contributor to various information management and vertical industry publications and is a clear, enthusiastic and experienced presenter.

Enterprise Content Management

- who‘s achieved it, how are they doing it and what are the issues?

Page 7

About AIIM

We are the community that provides education, research, and best practices to help organisations control information and maximise its value.

www.aiim.org.uk

Page 8

How would you best characterize your organization’s experience with document management and records management?

ECM Adoption –

Europe >10 emps (93)

AIIM associates

Not yet begun

Plan in the next 6 months.

Departmental Integrating across

depts

Implementing en-terprise scale

Completed enterprise scale

Market penetration

>75%

(within AIIM Community)

12% completed enterprise

roll out

Page 9

When you consider document and records management technologies, what is the most significant business driver ?

Business Drivers

All respondents (476)

Improve efficiency

Compliance

Optimize business processes

Mitigate risk

Improve customer service

Reduce costs

Faster turnaround/Improved response

Competitive advantage

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Costs,

Compliance

Customer Service

Page 10

When you consider document and records management technologies, what is the most significant business driver ?

Business Drivers - trend

All respondents (476)

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 20090%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Cost/EfficiencyCompliance/RiskCustomer Service

Cost higher than

Compliance in the slow

down

Page 11

Digital Landfill

Page 12

For each type of content, evaluate the degree of control that exists in your organization in managing it – “somewhat” or “very unmanaged”.

Content Types

All respondents (462)

Corporate records

Marketing materials

Paper forms

Computer reports

Paper correspondence

Web content - current

Office docs (Word, Excel, etc)

Faxes

Web content - archive

E-mails

E-mail attachments

Pictures & Sound files 

Blogs and Wikis

Instant messages

SMS messages

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

Text messages, IM, blogs &

wikis are off the corporate radar

in 70% of organizations

Confidence in compliance

56% have little or no confidence that emails and documents related to commitments and obligations made by them and their staff are recorded, complete, and retrievable?

37% are not very or not at all confident that their electronic records have not been changed, deleted, or inappropriately accessed, rising to 43% in larger companies.

Page 13

less than 5 days

5-14 days

15-30days

31-60 days

more than 60 days

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

Page 14

How long would it take to produce all of the organizational information related to a former customer or constituent?

Legal Discovery

All respondents (468)

28% would take more than a

month

18% had been exposed to a

legal challenge in the last 12 months and a further 15% in

the last 3 years – a 1 in 3 chance

Train new staff in how to deal with paper records

Train new staff in how to deal with electronic records

Update existing staff regularly on how to deal with paper records

Update existing staff regularly on how to deal with electronic records

Have guidelines on what constitutes a record

Set guidelines on where or how it should be stored

Set guidelines on how to deal with emails as records

Enforce a standard fileplan/classification scheme

Maintain an official thesaurus

None of these

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Page 15

Does your organisation?

Governance

Only half provide any

staff guidance on how to deal with records

Only 35% enforce any

kind of findability

10+ employees non-Trade (554)

Page 16

SharePoint/MOSS 2007 Roll-Out

Have you implemented Microsoft SharePoint 2007 (WSS/MOSS) in your organization?  

50% of organizations

polled are using or

implementing SharePoint + 12% with

plans

Not sure what SharePoint is; 3%

No plans; 35%

Plans in next 12-18 months; 13%

Use SharePoint 2003; 9%

Implementating now; 17%

Using WSS; 8%

Using MOSS; 16%

Page 17

Is there an executive endorsed plan in your organization as regards where SharePoint will and will not be used?

SharePoint Adoption

59% have no plan

24% IT lead

>10 employeesNot ECM suppliers, SharePoint users (502)

Yes: agreed by IT and Records Management

17%

Yes: set by IT24%

No: we are waiting to see how initial usage

goes29%

No30%

Page 18

Do you currently use or have immediate plans to use SharePoint 2007/MOSS in the following applications?

SharePoint plans

SharePoint users (233)

Collaboration/workspaces

Document management (check in/check out)

File share replacement

Portal

Web content management (internal/Intranet)

Forms processing

Business Process Management (Workflow)

Enterprise 2.0 (Forums, Blogs & Wikis)

Enterprise Search

Records management

Web content management (external)

Scanning and imaging

HR processes (Expenses, holidays, etc) 

Email management

Business Intelligence (BI)

Legal discovery/Legal hold

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Collaboration then DM

RM capabilities now better

understood.

Email very low

Page 19

Use of SharePoint with regard to existing ECM, DM and RM suite

SharePoint governance

SharePoint users (233)

Works in competition

Works in parallel

Fills in some functions

Is integrated with our existing suites

Sits on top of our DM/RM repository

SharePoint is our ECM suit

None of these

-10% 0% 10% 20% 30%

Records Management

IT with input from Records Management

IT with no input from Records Management

No one, but we have set up rules and metadata guidelines

No one, and it's completely out-of-control

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Who is driving and controlling SharePoint sites and applications

31% conflict between existing ECM and SharePoint

Governance is an issue for 44%

Page 20

Which of the following policies do you currently have in place for your SharePoint implementation?

Governance

>10 employeesNot ECM suppliers:

Policy on who can set up a team site, and their responsibilities

Policy on roles, administrative rights and access

Approved site design templates

User training plan

Aministrator training plan

Guidance on corporate classification and use of content types and columns

Quotas (numbers/storage) by user, by sites, etc.

Guidance on published content exposed to staff or public

Restrictions on stored content with regard to security – eg, HR, Finance

Guidance on use and longevity of blogs, projects and long-term sites

End-of-life policy for sites and contents

Policy on use of third party products and web parts

Legal discovery procedures

None of these

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Only 22% of SharePoint installations have data quality policies in place.

Page 21

Joined-Up Information - Options

“ECM Central”Migrate all content to a single/unified ECM system

Single sign-onConnect repositories using SOA, Open Source - or

SharePoint?

Enterprise SearchGo find it wherever it is

Manage in PlaceFind it and then apply a superset of management templates

to it for access, retention, legal hold, etc.

Page 22

Plans in the next 2 years to provide employees with a single point of access to content repositories across your organization

Multiple repositories

All respondents (349)

Migrate content to a centralised ECM system

Provide a single-sign-on portal using SharePoint

Provide a single-sign-on portal using an alternative provider

Provide a single-sign-on portal using Open Source

Use a dedicated Enterprise Search engine

Not planning to link up repositories

We do not have any significant repositories to link up

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

35% migrating to 1 system,

34% linking up via portals

9% Enterprise

Search

Page 23

Which connection mechanisms are you using or developing to link repositories?

Multiple Repositories

10+ employees non-Trade (479)

Considerable use of

customised links

In-house developed

Vendor supplied as standard

Vendor custom-developed

Third-party middleware

Enterprise search

None of these

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

Page 24

Which 3 of these typical problems have affected your organization’s document or records management implementation?

Implementation

All respondents (284)

Underestimated process and organizational issues

Uneven usage due to poor procedures and lack of enforcement

Lack of knowledge or training among our internal staff.

Project derailed by internal politics

Low user acceptance due to poor design or clumsy implementation

Excessive "scope creep"

Underestimated the effort to distill and migrate content

Poorly defined business case

Failed to secure agreement on fileplans, taxonomy and metadata

Failed to think of benefits/issues beyond our business unit.

Lack of knowledge or training among our external staff/suppliers.

Budget was overrun

Failed to prioritize "high-value" content

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%

AIIM State of ECM Industry 2009

Download the reports free from: www.aiim.org.uk/research

Page 25

Doug Miles

UK Managing Director, AIIM Europe

doug.miles@aiim.org.uk

Nic Archer, SVP Products, Vamosa

Since joining Vamosa in 2001, Nic has helped transform the company into a sector-defining software and solutions company specializing in the emerging area of Enterprise Content Governance (ECoG). Nic has led the expansion of Vamosa in the US, while continuing to work closely with the UK team on Vamosa's strategy and vision for the recently launched suite of products.

Nic has had involvement with all of Vamosa's major customers helping to identify solutions for challenging problems. He's enabled major investment and insurance companies to move content away from legacy applications using his in-depth understanding of the way enterprise applications work behind the scenes. He's quick to understand the underlying business issue and help customers choose and implement the correct technology solutions in the most cost-effective and beneficial manner.

The Big ChallengeHow To Deal With The Digital Landfill

Nic Archer – SVP Products - Vamosa

Duplicate contentInconsistent classificationIncomplete metadataAccessibilitySearch engine optimizationWeb and documents

The big challenge is how to deal with your content

Vamosa’s Vision for Enterprise Content Governance (ECoG)

Vamosa’s vision is to deliver control and structure to all enterprise content in a fully automated way with an end-to-end solution for Enterprise Content

Governance (ECoG) to reduce total cost of ownership, address compliance mandates,

optimise CMS investments and maintain content quality.

What is content governance?Compliance• eDiscovery• Complex brand

management• Audit• Version control

Maximize ROI• Storage• Optimised

CMS

Access• to corporate knowledge• Findability• Smarter working

Risk Mitigation• Legal and

industry regulations

• Audit trail• 360o view

Quality Built In

Content quality processes deliver Enterprise Content Governance

Content quality processes bring appropriate control and structure to contentThe content quality lifecycle must support:– Discovery– Enhancement– Standardization– Monitoring and maintenance

All within a rules-based framework that delivers against the organization’s content goals

Typical Pre-project perceptions

My content is uniqueWe have no standards applied to our content sourcesOur target system implementation is uniqueI can write some scripts to do preserve existing content – it’s easy!We can fill a room with interns or off-shore the job and deal with our content manuallyWhy bother with a systematic process as we are only doing this once?I have a tool, I don’t need a method

5 Simple Steps to Maintain Your Sanity

Based upon 10 years of experience and hundreds of customer engagements establish the following:

1. What content do I have ?2. What content do I need ?3. What sort of components do I need?4. What needs to be done to make it work in the

new system?5. What is the best way to deploy it into the target

system?

Step 1 – Get a proper audit

• Find all Documents, Images and HTML

• What is actually published?

• What is not in use?• What has been left behind

by poor change control?• What about multiple

versions of single content objects?

– One image for one product/person/idea

– One set of base data for multiple MIME types

• What about external content?

• What about hybrid systems (CM/Portal/Database)

• What about metadata?– What can be captured?– How can it be validated?– What about the new

information architecture?– Where is the metadata to be

stored?– Has it been classified?– Taxonomies?– How well implemented is the

existing metadata model?

Step 2 – Define what comes from where

Enterprise Applications

CM Repositories

Databases

File Systems

Step 3 – Break Sources Into Components

Step 4 – Enhance Content for Business and Target Requirements

Some Examples:ClassifyAdd taxonomyNew information architectureSpell checkBrand alignDe-duplicateMulti language enablementSearch engine optimizationSystematic naming conventionseDIscovery rulesWorkflow positioningDublin core metadataEtc.

Step 5 – Load Content into ECMS

Content as well as contextStructure and storageLinksBest to load using vendor approved methods– Import utilities– Vendor API– Load speeds will determine best approach

Use of change management

SOME USE CASES

Use case – Production Line

Global Life Sciences BusinessOver 1,000 corporate intranetsInto a single corporate portal Extensive input from stakeholdersMultiple sources, single targetClassified, taxonomy applied, de-duplicated, archived redundant contentCreated 2 VIA production lines – APL, MPLCompleted in 15% of the time and 15% of the original cost estimates for manual/scripting alternatives

Use Case – Small SharePoint

Major European airlineTime constrained (4 weeks from start to finish)Critical document migration (Sharepoint 2003 to MOSS 2007)Less than 100,000 documentsImplemented new naming standards, classified, new IACompleted in under four weeks40% of cost and 20% of time versus manual alternatives

Use Case – Large Website Estate

Top 3 global accounting and tax practiceMigration of all corporate web estate to Vignette v7Highly regulatedExtreme time pressuresUpdates for SEO, classification, new IA, correct use of copyright attributes, corporate taxonomy, securityCompleted in 25% of estimated manual time with ~70% cost savings

Use Case – Large Document and Web Implementation

Major European Intra Government AgencyVery high profile MOSS2007 projectCreation of migration process for all web and document content for all intranets and file sharesCreated initial migration rules base, enabled customer to conduct subsequent migrationsCreated a two year work programNo alternative methods could be found

Use case Very Large Enterprise

Leading global technology and solutions providerIntegrate into portal conceptsReplicate existing IA, add further classification and categorization1:n relationships between sources and targetRequired phased roll out – hardware, software, consulting, geographiesNo alternatives were considered due to the complex nature of the project

QUESTIONS

Further Information

Thank you for taking time out to attend this webinar, if you would like a copy of the slides or you would like further information on this topic please email marketing@vamosa.com.