bill english, mvp, mcse, mcsa, mct ceo, english, bleeker and associates, inc
DESCRIPTION
Bill English, MVP, MCSE, MCSA, MCT CEO, English, Bleeker and Associates, Inc. Mindsharp , Summit 7 and the Best Practices Conference. Putability and Findability: How SharePoint’s Managed Metadata Service Solves the Taxonomization of Information. English, Bleeker and Associates, Inc. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Putability and Findability: How SharePoint’s Managed Metadata Service Solves the Taxonomization of Information
Bill English, MVP, MCSE, MCSA, MCTCEO, English, Bleeker and Associates, Inc.Mindsharp, Summit 7 and the Best Practices Conference
English, Bleeker and Associates, Inc.
3
Leaders and Experts In SharePoint: AUTHORSBill English has authored or co-authored 13 books since 2000 on SharePoint and Exchange products.
Todd Bleeker has authored or co-authored 3 books on Microsoft's integrated suite of products including three SharePoint books.
Ben Curry is the author or co-author on 3 books on SharePoint products and technologies
Other Authors on staff or Alliance:Marylin WhitePenny CoventryDaniel GalantDaniel WebsterMark SchneiderPaul StorkSteve SmithCraig CarpenterCorro'll Driskell And more
Agenda Understanding Putability and Findability Outlining the problems with Putability
and Findability in most organizations Understanding how the Managed
Metadata Service resolves many of these problems
What is Putability Definition:
The quality of putting content in the correct location with the correct metadata
The degree to which we put quality information into our information management system
Truths: What goes in, must come out: garbage in,
garbage out Our users will resist taking the time to put
quality information into the system Findability is directly impacted by our Putability
practices
What is Findability? Definition:
The quality of being locatable or navigable The degree to which objects are easy to discover or
locate Truths:
You can’t use what you can’t find Information that can’t be found is worthless Our customer’s can’t purchase what they can’t find Information that is hard to find is hardly used Authority, trust and findability are interwoven Key to success when working with information is
findability
Putability, Findability & Technology Most are clueless when it comes to
thinking about how information should go into SharePoint This wasn’t encouraged by the product
team Collaboration has been the focus
Most equate Findability with an application: buy a search application and you’ve solved findability
PLUG IT IN, TURN IT ON AND FIND IT!
Google’s Promise
A robust Information Architecture solution will:1. save your company significant monies through increased efficiencies2. while simultaneously giving your organization a greater ROI on its’ Microsoft Technology Investments3. that contributes to a competitive advantage4. by making information “faster” in your organization
Agenda Understanding Putability and Findability Outlining the problems with Putability
and Findability in most organizations Understanding how the Managed
Metadata Service resolves many of these problems
Agenda Understanding Putability and Findability Outlining the problems with Putability
and Findability in most organizations Understanding how the Managed
Metadata Service resolves many of these problems
Inefficient ECM Systems Over 30 billion original documents are
created and consumed each year Cost of documents is estimated to be as
much as 15% of annual revenues 85% of documents are never retrieved 50% of documents are duplicate in some
way 60% of stored documents are obsolete For every $1 spent to create the
document, $10 are spent to manage it
Excuses for not having ECM If we need it, we can usually find it…
Just send an email – someone will find it for me No one will ever sue us
If we do get sued, we’ll find what we need to defend ourselves
We’ve got to pick our battles $20/file a document, $120/find a misfiled
document & $220 to re-produce a lost document Green/Schmeen
NMP if a document is copied 19 times
Lack of ECM Excuses
Information security isn’t at the top of our list of things to do – I trust my employees If people want to take home work, that’s
a good thing! ECM is too expensive and there’s
little ROI, so why invest in it? Reality: you’re already paying for a bad
ECM – a good ECM will save you money through better efficiencies
Is Findability Understood? When asked “How well is findability understood in
your organization”, the following answers were given: It is well understood and addressed: 17% It is vaguely understood: 31% Not sure how search and findability are different: 30% No clear understanding of findability at all: 22%
Over half (55%) of organizations today either don’t know what findability is or they are not able to differentiate findability from search technologies
Many believe that if they have a stand-alone search tool, then findability is being adequately addressed
Findability vs. Search Search is too-often viewed as an application-specific
solution for findability Search focuses on trying to ask the right question Search focuses on “matching” keywords with content
under the assumption that if I find the right word, I’ve found the right content
Findability is not a technology: It is a way of managing information that is baked into the organization It is a well-defined and well-executed strategic
model of consistent practices and actions Technologies contribute to an overall Findability solution,
but a robust findability solution is much more than the implementation of a few technologies or applications
The Paradox of Findability as a Corporate Strategy When asked the degree to which Findability is critical
to their overall business goals and success, 62% of respondents indicated that it is imperative or significant. Only 5% felt it had minimal or no impact on business success.
Yet, 49% responded that even though Findability is strategically essential, they have no formal plan or set of goals for Findability in their organization.
Of the other 51% who claimed to have a strategy, 26% reported that their strategy was ad hoc, meaning that they have no strategy at all.
So: 75% have no Findability strategy, even though many believe it is strategically essential
The Cost of Information WorkTask Avg Hours per
Worker Per Week
Cost per Worker per Week
Cost Per Worker Per Year
Email: Read & Answer
14.5 418.3 21,752
Create Documents
13.3 333.7 19,952
Search 9.5 274.1 14,251Analyze Information
9.6 277.0 14, 401
Edit/Review 8.8 253.9 13,201
Hours Wasted Per WeekTask Avg Hours Cost Per
WorkerCost Per Year
Search but not find
3.5 101 5,251
Recreating Content
3.0 87 4,501
Acquiring documents with little or not automation
2.3 66 3,450
Version Control Issues
2.2 63 3,300
The Cost of Poor Findability Avg number of queries per day: 20 Avg number of hours/week spent finding
info: 6.5 3.5 hours spent trying to find information but
not finding it 3.0 hours recreating information that you
know exists, but you cannot find 6.5 hours/week = $9,750 cost/worker/year
10K workers: $97,500,000/year Too high? OK – Cut it by 90%:
$9.75M/year
What keeps us from Finding Information?
Poor search functionality: 71% Inconsistency in how we tag/describe data: 59% Lack of adequate tags/descriptors: 55% Information not available electronically: 49% Poor navigation: 48% Don’t know where to look: 48% Constant information change: 37% Can’t access the system that hosts the info: 30% Don’t know what I’m looking for: 22% Lack the skills to find the information: 22%
Who is responsible for tagging? Authors: 40% Records Managers: 29% SME’s: 25% Anyone: 23% Don’t know: 12% No one: 16% This means that 76% don’t know who is responsible
for tagging information to make it more findable. Result of not having information governance Can’t have SharePoint governance without IG
Findability and ECM
29% - Sharepoint is working in conflict with other ECM systems
16% - Sharepoint is integrated with existing ECM suites
12% - It’s the only ECM suite 43% - SharePoint is used to “fill in
some functions”
Findability and ECM
36% - IT rolls out SharePoint with no input from Record Managers or ECM teams
14% - admit that no one is in charge and that SharePoint + ECM is out of control
SMS/text messages, blogs, wikis and other web 2.0 technologies lack inclusion in the ECM solution in 75% of organizations This represents a major risk to
companies
Research Summary: We spend a lot of time looking for and re-
creating information that already exists Most organizations don’t have a coherent
findability solution Most organizations have not aligned
SharePoint with their larger ECM needs Many organizations confuse search with
findability Yet, most organizations believe that
Findability is strategically important to their success
Other Putability/Findability Problems Information Overload Databreaches eDiscovery
Information Overload False Premise: More information is better. True Premise: We need the right
information at the right time Information overload reduces findability The number of sources of information is
bewildering: Books, magazines, newspapers, billboards,
blogs, wikis, web sites, telephone, television, video, email, text messages, instant messages, music, social networks, conversations, etc….
Information Overload
$900 Billion cost to the economy in 2008 (WSJ)
54% of us report feeling a “high” when we find information that we’re looking for
80% of us feel “driven to gather as much information as possible to keep up with customers and competitors”
Information Overload Research Study at Kings College in London:
Information overload harms concentration more than smoking marijuana
IQ dropped by 10 points during information overload while smoking pot dropped IQ’s by 5 points
Information Overload Over half of us report experiencing email
fatigue Spend 1.5 hours/day processing emails.
20% spend over 3 hours/day processing emails
67% process emails outside of work hours
“Sheer overload” is reported to be the biggest problem with email
Findability is harmed
Information Overload Psychiatrist Ed Hallowell: Attention
Deficit Trait (ADT) Have too much input – more than you can
possibly manage Make decisions quickly – without reflection Push the “close door” button repeatedly in
the elevator Can’t manage as well as you’d like Try harder and harder to keep up Addicted to speed
Regulatory Breaches
35 states have laws requiring that individuals be notified if their confidential or personal data has been lost, stolen or compromised.
Privacy Rights Clearinghouse has identified more than 215 million records of U.S. Residents that have been exposed due to security breaches since 2005
2007 Study by Ponemon Institute Avg cost of a data breach is
$197/record 43% increase from 2005 Avg total cost per reporting company:
$6.3M Cost of lost business accelerates:
Increased from 2005 at 30%, avg $4.1M/company and $128/record compromised.
Lost business now accounts for 65% of data breach costs compared to 56% in 2006 study.
2007 Study Continued
Third-party breaches (contractors, consultants, partners & vendors) Accounted for 40% of the data breaches
– up from 29% in 2006 & 21% in 2005 Most costly: $231/record
CheckPoint Study 2009
#1 threat to company’s network security: employees who inadvertently expose confidential information Hackers were #5 Mobile devices were #12 Competitor espionage #14
E-Discovery and FindabilityAmendments to the Federal Rules on Civil Procedure Amended December
1, 2006 – adds electronic files
Significant departure from paper-based discovery rules
Complicates findability, data storage and exposure to liability
What is E-Discovery? Electronic discovery (e-Discovery) refers to
“any process in which electronic data is sought, located, secured, and searched with the intent of using it as evidence in a civil or criminal legal case”.
This includes but is not limited to computer forensics, email archiving, online review, and proactive management.
The emergent e-Discovery field augments legal, constitutional, political, security, and personal privacy issues.
When does eDiscovery happen?
Dispute
CustomerEmployeePartner
Company
File Civil Claim
Discovery Trial or Settlement
Discovery is the exchange of evidence between the parties.On Dec. 1, 2006, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure guide discovery in the US federal court system have been amended to include electronic documents.
42
Electronic Discovery IT and security teams are expected to help with
the management of such information Processes: creation, storage, archival, and destruction Security objectives: availability, confidentiality, and
integrity Organizations will need closer ties between legal
and IT groups to create improved policies and infrastructure
Sometimes you might be a third party to the case but still may have important information Banks are often in this situation
If you have reasonable expectation to be involved in a case, then you have a duty to preserve evidence
43
E-Discovery Risks are Real There are many horror stories about
adverse judgments when ESI isn’t preserved•Past rulings have resulted in millions/billions in penalties• Philip Morris (emails not saved: $2.75M fines, witnesses barred)
• Bank of America Securities (slow to produce emails and records; inaccurate statements about ESI: $10M fine to SEC)
• Morgan Stanley (backup tapes not disclosed: judge allowed jury to infer fraud; $1.5B judgment – in review)
•28% of organizations will take more than a month to produce documents for e-discovery
Copyright English, Bleeker & Associates, Inc. 44
Almost two years after the FRCP Amendments:
57% of Law Firms surveyed say their clients are not ready to find and produce information relevant to litigation.
39% of In-House Counsel surveyed say their companies are not prepared for e-discovery.
Solution ValidationeDiscovery is (still) mission critical
Information Week: Companies Not Ready For E-Discovery, September 23, 2008
Early Disclosure Discussions
Outline preservation steps undertaken Difficulty to locate and preserve is not an
excuse Preservation Policies ≠ Retention
Policies Retention: winnow out unneeded info Preservation: retain info pertinent to the
proceedings Lack of agreement on Preservation
methods and scope often results in court orders Difficulty to locate and preserve is not an
excuse
E-Discovery and SharePoint
Check with legal dept about what information should be findable and by whom in a legal proceeding.
Take their results as part of the business requirements for your SharePoint farm
Develop technical & governance req’s
Implement and monitor Legal should use Search to help
discover non-compliance
Agenda Understanding Putability and Findability Outlining the problems with Putability
and Findability in most organizations Understanding how the Managed
Metadata Service resolves many of these problems
MMS – in a Nutshell
Content type distribution system Enables enterprise-wide CT usage Retains local control and extensibility Pull technology
Enterprise taxonomy development Allows global taxonomy to be enforced Allows local growth of the taxonomy Allows taxonomy to be developed over
time Flexible, extensible, “smart”
MMS Impact
Department Solution
• Enterprise Solution
Collaboration Focus
• Information Focus
People Focus
• Business Focus
Problem Putability Findability MMS Feature
Users don’t want to take the time to tag information Force metadata
assignments via closed lists and DIP
Users don’t know what metadata to select Users can select
from a set of choices in a choice list – MMS will make suggestions
Users need to add their own metadata Users can add
terms to an open list. Admin can merge words in a term set later on
Need to use same metadata constructs in the Enterprise
Content Types can be distributed across the enterprise
Need to enforce global metadata with local additions
Content types can be extended at the site level
THE MMS IS ABOUT PUTABILITY, NOT FINDABILITY