Sean R. Nicholson

Continuing with my posts on great Twitter resources, this is a followup to my 99 Great Internal Comms Resources,  99 Great Intranet Resources and 99 Great ECM Resources posts. Below is a link to my list of 99+ great SharePoint Resources on Twitter. If you’re looking for the folks who tweet about SharePoint as an Intranet platform, ECM solution, and a collaboration tool…these are your folks! Pay careful attention and you may see folks who are also providing links to some valuable SharePoint alternatives, as well.

Sean’s list of 99+ Great SharePoint resources on Twitter

Know someone that I missed from the list? Definitely let me know. Shameless self-promotion is also allowed if you think you should be included, just make sure your tweets back up your request.

You can check out the list below, and feel free to leave a comment if there’s anyone else I should add.

Sean R. Nicholson

2009 has been a great year full of exciting opportunities, great projects, engaging conversations, and healthy dialog about the topics of Intranets, Enterprise Content Management, and Enterprise 2.0. As I reflect on the events that have occurred over the last year, I’m amazed at how much has transpired and how many new people I have had the honor of connecting with.

Here are some of the highlights, that I thought I would share. In 2009, I am please to have:

• Started the IntranetExperience blog as an effort to capture some of my Intranet design and implementation experiences and share them with others.
• Created a Twitter account, which drove me to read hundreds (maybe thousands) of articles posted by fellow Tweeps.
• Compiled a following list of more than 600 invaluable resources who tweet on Intranets, Enterprise Content Management, Social Media, and Enterprise 2.0.
• Earned the privilege of being followed by more than 700 folks on Twitter who think I might have something valuable to say everyone once in a while.
• Connected online with some amazing Intranet resources including:
  • Toby Ward of Prescient Digital Media;
  • Carolyn Douglas and Rachel Lai of Intranet Connections;
  • James Robertson and Alex Manchester of Step Two Designs
  • Peter Richards, who writes the Wheat and Chaff blog
  • Jane McConnell of NetJMC
  • Christy Season, who blogs at ChristyWeb.com
  • Wedge, who blogs at kilobox.net
• Engaged in thought-provoking dialogs on enterprise content management with ECM gurus like:
  • Cheryl McKinnon of Nuxeo
  • Martin Sumner-Smith of OpenText
  • Carl Frappaolo and John Mancini of AIIM
  • Sascha Ohler and Mike Wessel of Perceptive Software
• Had incredible face-to-face conversations with other Intranet and ECM professionals including folks like:
  • Karl Geisler
  • Jeff Allen
  • Michele Sperle
  • Dan Dillon
  • Ken Berlack
  • Dan Kneeshaw
  • Angela Cullen
• Developed 20 different subject matter-oriented lists on Twitter of outstanding experts in their respective areas.
• Helped educate others that social media isn’t just people blogging about their families and tweeting about what they ate for breakfast. I successfully convince others that tweeting is a good thing, and some of them have even stuck with it.
• Worked with great folks like Patty Dugan, Matt Feeny, Jill Ducey, Paul Arhnold, and Jeremy McNieve to develop an initial Social Media strategy around Twitter.

All of this, on top of enjoying a great day job, spending quality time with my family, and carving out a bit of time for myself.

Not too shabby, if I don’t say so myself.

What’s even better is I have even higher hopes to build on the foundation of 2009 and expand these activities, conversations, and opportunities in 2010!

A special thanks to everyone I have listed here for their thoughts, comments, and engagement. And to anyone that I might have left off, this post is likely a work in progress and a gentle reminder of any accomplishment that should be added to the list is much appreciated.

Happy New Year to everyone and my 2010 be your best year yet!

–Sean

Sean R. Nicholson

Last week was a great week for online discussions relating to Intranets. On Monday, Alex Manchester of Step Two Designs posted an article to his blog asking whether the term Intranet is dead. His thoughts were sparked by a recent presentation by Jane McConnell of NetJMC and the conversation that ensued was a healthy dialog on the future of Intranets, their relevance in a world of social media, and whether the term “intranet” was really the best way to describe an interactive workplace. The conversation continued throughout the week and I’d encourage anyone who works with Intranets to check out the threaded discussion and add their $.02.

Tuesday continued the interesting online conversations as Jarrod Gingras and Alan Pelz-Sharpe of CMS Watch made his predictions for technology in 2010. One of particular interest to me was his prediction #1 that :

1) Enterprise Content Management and Document Management will go their separate ways
ECM as a marketing and technical concept has great validity. But the idea of having a single overarching platform to manage all sources of content management only works well in those enterprises that follow a unified and services-oriented architectural approach to IT.

I agree with Jarrod and my interpretation of this prediction is that organizations that aren’t able to settle on a single vendor for all of their information systems or aren’t able to invest in a comprehensive services-oriented architecture just won’t be concerned with Enterprise Content Management (ECM) because they won’t be able to address every departmental business process problems with a single ECM tool.

To expand on Jarrod’s prediction, I’m thinking that as more and more vendors build document management functionality into their applications, organizations will be less concerned with where it is stored, as long as it is stored properly, is accessible to the end-users that need it, and can be discovered and produced in time of legal necessity. Instead of costly redevelopment of business processes to restructure where content is stored, organizations will invest in search technology that allows content to be stored in native applications and use search tools like Microsoft Enterprise Search, Autonomy, and Google appliances to ferret out information.

In other words, federated search will become crucial to organizations that choose not to implement a structured ECM architecture.

The results of this kind of shift are as follows:

1. Content and documents  will reside in their native application, allowing the information to have more context than if it were stored in a centralized ECM system.
2. Those ECM vendors who wish to provide value to the enterprise must figure out how to store the content centrally, yet serve it back to end users in a context that is meaningful to their end users.
3. ECM vendors who provide true, enterprise-scale software MUST offer a full services-oriented architecture that will allow business applications to easily access the content and surface documents in the context of the business application.

S0…this brings me to my question of the week. Is Enterprise Content Management going the way of the Intranet and becoming an outdated notion? Will better federated search technologies negate the need for a central repository? Are organizations better off investing in the functional elements of ECM like document management, records management, and business process management instead of buying the whole enchilada?

I’m curious to see what others think…looking forward to thoughts/comments.

Sean R. Nicholson

As a follow up to my 99 Great Intranet Resources post, I have also created a list of 99 great Enterprise Content Management Resources on Twitter. If you’re looking for the folks who know, speak, live, learn, and love ECM, these are your folks! Know someone that I missed from the list? Definitely let me know. Shameless self-promotion is also allowed if you think you should be included, just make sure your tweets back up your request.

You can check out the list below, and feel free to leave a comment if there’s anyone else I should add.

Sean’s ECM Twitter List

Sean R. Nicholson

Having been in the field of information management for quite a while now, I have developed a few credos that seem to prove more and more useful as the volumes of organizational information continues to grow. I used to drive one of my previous team absolutely crazy with this one:

“The only thing worse than no information is BAD information”

Think about it. When you have no information, you seek out answers, solutions, and advice. When you have bad information,  it’s likely that you don’t know it’s bad, so you react to the information. Only after you have used the information and determined that it was incorrect do you (after a few choice words) continue your search for good information.

Take an example of a call center representative who answers the phone and provides the customer on the other end with what they think to be the most current product prices from a document they printed yesterday. Little do they know that a new copy of the rate sheet was published a couple hours ago with significant rate changes that is now impacting their potential sale.

Did they have information? Yes! Was it good information? No!

The reality is that organizations are generating more and more information on an hourly basis. Take a moment and think about all the documents, spreadsheets, presentations, emails, voice mails, and sticky notes you generated on a daily basis just 3 years ago. Now, add modern day blogs, tweets, text messages, forum posts, comments, status updates, videos, podcasts, and wiki posts to your list and what do you get? More information? Definitely! But the larger problem is the fact that the information is now spread out in more places, making it harder for other employees and customers to find it.

In the past customers could simply call a 1-800 line for support and get one-stop service. In the modern day of social media, though, they can call the 800 number, tweet their problems, look for solutions in a knowledge base, email, complain in an online forum, post a video on YouTube of your product malfunctioning, or blog about it. Compound the problem with the fact that your employees are having a difficult time finding the most current methods to resolve the customer issues and you have quite an information disaster in the making. In fact, it’s a situation that could have a negative impact on both customer and employee satisfaction.

For some, the temptation might be to throw their hands up in the air and surrender to the fact that there are just too many channels out there. If you’re curious as to how confusing it really is, just take a look at all the new channels being created in the social media space alone via the Social Media Prism! Now think about what your employee-to-employee and employee-to-customer communication channels are going to look like in 5 years. Believe me…I understand the desire to just crawl back in bed and ignore social media. The reality is, however, that few business ever succeed by ignoring change. Instead, you’re going to need to stop dismissing social media (both internal and external) as a fad and start working on how to resolve the issue.

Unfortunately, I don’t have a magic product that I can sell for $19.99 to serve as the magic bullet. This one’s going to require smart people in your organization rolling up their sleeves and building a solid information management architecture. No, it’s not easy, but it’s going to be a requirement for businesses to survive in the future! A good place to being would be by looking at the following criteria:

1. How do your employees work? Are they being asked to store information in multiple locations (e.g. My Documents, file shares, document repositories, WIKIs, etc…)?
2. Do your employees know where to go for the single source of truth? (hint, hint…it should be your Intranet)
3. Where are you storing your information? In legacy applications that aren’t searchable? In repositories that require no periodic content review?
4. Does your organization offer a single search interface that allows employees to search information in multiple repositories?
5. Is your information governance killing your employees ability to share information (e.g. no blogs, wikis, microblogs, etc…)?
6. How are your customers interact with your organization? Are they seeking answers from multiple sources (e.g. Phone, website, Twitter, etc..)
7. Do your customers know where to go for a single source of the truth (hint, hint…it should be your Web site)
8. Do you have the infrastructure in place to respond to new types of interactions? Do you have corporate accounts for sites like Twitter, YouTube, Blogger, LinkedIn, and Facebook? Does someone monitor searches on your company and products?
9. Are you making it as easy as possible for your customers to get help and resolve issues?
10. Are YOU embracing internal and external information tools that will allow your employees to share information more easily and provide customers with more ways to serve themselves or seek assistance?

If you haven’t started a review of your current information architecture, it’s time to start and because I find the Social Media Prism to be so useful in explaining the external growth challenge that faces organizations, I have also put together an internal information stratification diagram that hopefully will help IT, Intranet, and ECM professionals demonstrate the internal complexities that exist inside the firewall.  Click on the image below for a larger view or feel free to print out a PDF version.

As always….this is a work in progress and all input, comments, feedback are welcome!

Internal Information Stratification Wheel

Sean R. Nicholson

Many Intranet professionals are already leveraging the power of Twitter to market their activities outside of the firewall, but few have taken the next step add microblogging as a feature to their organizational Intranet. Luckily, the great folks at the Laconica project are building an open source microblog application that can easily be installed in both Windows and Unix/Linux environments and rolled out in a matter of hours.

What Is The Laconica Project?

The Laconica Project consists of a group of volunteer development professionals committed to creating an open source microblogging application that allows users to share 140 character messages.  Basically, you can install the application on a Windows, Unix, or Linux server inside your firewall and ensure that the “tweets” (or whatever you choose to call them internally) are only visible to your organization.

How Can I Test Laconica To Make Sure It Will Work For My Organization?

If you’re interested in testing out Laconica without having to install it on one of your servers, just create an account at www.identi.ca. Identi.ca is the largest implementation of the Laconica and includes all of the functionality that you’ll see when implementing the application in your environment. Keep in mind that Identi.ca is open to the world, so anything your post there will be published to the Public timeline and is visible to the everyone.

Collaboration Is Key In Any Organization

What Added Benefits Can Microblogging Add To My Intranet?

The key benefit to implementing microblogging withing your organizations is collaboration. I am a firm believer that any tool that gets your organization “talking” and sharing information is a good thing. There are a variety of additional benefits, however, that can help you complete your microblogging strategy proposal:

One-To-Many Communications

One of the most common questions I heard when proposing internal microblogging was “How is this different from Messenger/Jabber/SameTime?”. These tools are primarily used for one-to-one communication where one user engages with another user to seeks answers to questions or discuss a topic. Some messenger clients allow for the creation of group discussions, but these tools are not primarily used for group conversations.

By allowing your users to share with the group as a whole, you facilitate “one-to-many” communication where the post can be shard with the everyone. This allows other users to then seek out the content by browsing or through searches.

Archiving Of Important Conversations

One of the unfortunate downsides to Messenger/Jabber/Sametime clients is that once the conversation is over and the dialog box is closed, the conversation disappears into cyberspace and is lost to the organization. If your organization uses one of these clients, think about how many questions are answered in one-to-one conversations each day that would be valuable to the organization if they were retained, indexed, and made searchable. That’s where microblogging beats messenger clients, hands-down.

With microblogging, all of the messages are stored in a database, made searchable and, if your organization leverages the hashtag functionality, the information can be categorized for easy retrieval. Hashtags are keywords preceded by the # sign, which allows microblogs to group posts by topic. So when discussing microblogging, any user that adds #microblog to their message will automatically categorize their message with others with the same hashtag.

Open Communication Beyond Email

In organizations where messenger clients aren’t present, the question about microblogging is usually “How is this different from email?”. Like messenger clients, email is a siloed communication vehicle that allows only those on the distribution to read the content. The only way that the information can be shared with the entire organization using email is by sending it to a distribution group that contains everyone. And we all know how much we love those types of emails. Organizations quickly become desensitized to content in mass-emails, so you risk losing the value of the information.

Microblogging allows users to seek out the information when they need it, instead of having it pushed to them in an email and stored in their their personal mail folders. As a result, users can easily get the most up-to-date information based on how the microblog conversations have progressed. Additionally, since the information is public to everyone in the organization, you break down the communication silos that exist within email.

Knowledge Management

Let the experts in your organization share their knowlege one tidbit at a time.

One of the difficulties that organizations constantly wrestle with is getting the information stored inside their employees heads into a format that can be stored, indexed, and searched. Microblogging does exactly that by allowing employees to share small tidbits of information with the organization at their convenience. They don’t have to devote vast amounts of time to writing “job aids” and how-to documents. Instead, a simple message like “Remember to put cover sheet version 2.2 on all of the new TPS reports. #tps” will provide users with a reminder that version 2.2 is the correct cover sheet. By adding #tps to the message, any user who searches for #tps will find the latest message in chronological order. This way, when another user posts a message stating “A new version of the TPS cover sheet should be used, version 2.3. #tps” all users will see the new post at the top of the timeline. Combine these posts with hyperlinks to the new version of the TPS report, and you have a great knowledge management combination.

Topical Filtering By Hashtags

Is I indicated previously, hashtags really bring out the power of a microblog. Any microblog training should include the use of hashtags so that users understand the value of categorizing their content. Not every post requires a hashtag, but the more your users use them, the easier it will be to location content.

Interest Organization Using Groups

Microblogs like Laconica also allow users to create groups. Groups allow like-minded individuals or those working on a common topic/project to share information among the group. By posting a message that says “!financianalyst To all the financial analysts, be sure to submit completed expense reports by 05/05/09.”, the user is sending a reminder to anyone in the financialanalyst group. While the message is still posted on the public timeline (viewable to the entire organization), any Financial Analyst can filter their messages to just those targeted at their group by visiting the timeline dedicated to their group.

How Do I Drive Adoption Of A Microblog?

Driving the adoption of microblogging is all about value. If your users see no value in participating, they won’t adopt the technology. The best way to drive value is to show it in action. Identify a group of Twitter users in your organization and ask them to participate in a pilot project. Spend 30 days posting to the microblog,  ensuring that you are using the hashtags and group functionality. More than likely, after 30 days of posting, you will be able to show some specific topics, groups, and posts that have driven value in your organization. By demonstrating the value, you’re likely to have a much easier time showing why microblogging is useful than just simply trying to explain what Twitter is and how it works.

Have thoughts or input? I’m always open to constructive feedback in the comments! I’d love to hear successes (and yes…even failures) of internal microblogging. Share those stories in your comments!

Sean R. Nicholson

A few years ago, I was in charge of an RFP for a Fortune 500 company to select an Intranet portal application and portal content management system. Thinking about the requirements for that portal and how they would change in this age of social networking got me thinking about how the requirements would change if I were to conduct that same RFP today.

Portal Requirements in 2005

Back in the “olden days” of horizontal portal requirements (you know…a few years ago),  the top requirements for our enterprise portal were as follows:

1. Enterprise scalability, with current requirements at 25,000 end-users, but scaling to 100,000 with additional hardware and licenses.
2. Easy to use, graphical user interface that allows end users to view targeted content and easily navigate to pages within the portal using  either an organizational or functional page taxonomy.
3. Provide portal administrators with the ability to secure content to groups, organizations, and individuals.
4. Provide a WYSIWYG rich text editing interface that allows users to create and edit content, based on their permissions and group membership.
5. Provide a single search interface that allows users to search for content that is target to their account based on assigned permissions
6. Provide a workflow tool that allows content to be reviewed and approved prior to publication
7. Provide a customizable portlet or widget-based interface that allows end-users to customize their experience.
8. Provide portal administrators with a flexible design and administration interface that allows administrators to create page templates that standardize on some page elements (e.g. header, navigation, mandatory portlets).
9. Provide functionality to interface with an enterprise Identity Management Solution.
10. Provide analytical reporting that details usage activity, content quantity, and hyperlink status (e.g. number and location of broken links)
11. The ability to integrate with existing enterprise applications such as the document management system, time reporting system, and expense management system using a Services Oriented Architecture.

Like I said, these were the high level requirements that we looked at. We actually had more than 300 specific technical and functional requirements, but these hit the major functionality we were looking for.

As you can see, though, these portal requirements are based on an “information-push” concept, where a core group of individuals (maybe 50-75 for the entire corporation) create all of the content and push it out to the masses. While we did have requirements for collaborative items like forums, they were listed as optional and we weren’t quite sure whether we wanted to allow end-users to start creating content on their own in a forum environment. Pretty much typical information control tactics that are present (even today) in many large organizations.

Changes To The Portal Requirements In 2009

While many of these requirements would still hold true, an information portal in today’s culture would definitely focus more on collaboration and content management than the pushing information out to the masses. Based on my experiences with some of the popular social networking platforms, my top requirements for the same sized organization would probably look more like this:

1. Enterprise scalability, with current requirements at 25,000 end-users, but scaling to 100,000 with additional hardware and licenses.
2. Easy to use, graphical user interface that allows end users to view targeted content and easily navigate to pages within the portal using  either an organizational or functional page taxonomy.
3. Provide portal administrators with the ability to secure content to groups, organizations, and individuals.
4. Provide both a rich-text content management system that allows portal administrators to deliver content and a WIKI environment that allows end-user to create their own page content
5. Provide a single search interface that allows users to search for content that is target to their account based on assigned permissions
6. Provide content creators (both in the CMS and WIKI environments) the ability to review content additions and comments if they choose to enable the feature.
7. Provide a customizable portlet or widget-based interface that allows end-users to customize their experience.
8. Provide portal administrators with a flexible design and administration interface that allows administrators to create page templates that standardize on some page elements (e.g. header, navigation, mandatory portlets).
9. Provide functionality to interface with an enterprise Identity Management Solution.
10. Provide analytical reporting that details usage activity, content quantity, and hyperlink status (e.g. number and location of broken links)
11. Provide the ability to integrate with existing enterprise applications such as the document management system, time reporting system, and expense management system using a Services Oriented Architecture.
12. Provide end-users with the ability to create custom application and information widgets that can be shared across the enterprise.
13. Allow users to easily share updates with others on their work through personal status updates
14. Allow users to create and manage groups/networks that can collaborate through a WIKI interface or a discussion forum interface. Users should be able to store and review documents as attachments within these groups. Users should be able to collaborate and version these documents and the applications should maintain an audit trail.
15. Allow users to create custom events and invite users and groups to those events. Individual and group events should roll up to a common corporate calendar that displays events to users based on their permissions and group memberships.
16. Allow users to share digital media including photos, audio files, and video files. Users should be able to collaborate and version these files and the application should maintain an audit trail.

So What Just Happened? Those Don’t Sound Like Portal Requirements!

Basically, in the process of writing those new requirements, I changed my RFP from being one focused on a portal, to one focused on an Enterprise Content Management system. Not an ECM as we know it today (which are primarily focused on Web/Intranet content management, document management, and digital asset management), but to an ECM platform that requires the following:

• A customizable presentation layer (the portal)
• A flexible content management system (traditional WYSIWYG content management and collaborative WIKI)
• The ability for end-users to create application mashups
• A lightweight document management system
• Social networking capabilities through collaborative groups/networks
• A lightweight digital asset management system
• Enterprise search functionality

Previously, ECM players such as Stellent, Documentum, and OpenText have not offered a portal interface to their products. Instead, they focused on their ability to interface with portal such as WebCenter Interaction (formerly AquaLogic User Interaction (formerly Plumtree)), IBM WebSphere, Microsoft SharePoint, and Vignette portal.

As a result, some of those solutions are being gobbled up by the portal players in hopes of creating the true Enterprise Content Management System of the future. Some of the portal players, like Vignette and Microsoft have anticipated the merging of portal and CMS, and have opportunities to add social networking to their platforms. In the end, the days of offering a standalone portal are probably long gone and we’ll soon see the horizontal portal players roll into the ECM magic quadrant.

Thoughts or comments? I’m always open to additions and constructive criticism in you comments.

Sean R. Nicholson

A couple of years ago, I was involved in the selection and construction of a new Intranet portal for a large telecom company. The organization had nearly 25,000 employees at the time, distributed all over the United States and they had previously relied heavily on an Intranet portal to communicate corporate events, share HR information, and collaborate on business documents.  The project I was working on at the time was focused on creating a brand new Intranet portal for a spin-off company.

One of the most memorable moments of the project occurred during one of the initial funding conversations, when a Senior Executive at the company asked a very simple question. Amid all of the discussions about functionality, Identity Management, timelines, user adoption, and vendor selection, the Senior Exec simply asked “Do we really need an Intranet portal?”  The question was powerful enough to quiet a room of 25 people and, for an uncomfortable 30 seconds or so, I mentally wrestled between blurting out a visceral response like  ”Are you kidding?” and taking a more tactical response explaining the value of a portal. Luckily, while I was pondering the choice, one of my IT Execs jumped in and provided a quick, concise answer as to the value of the Intranet portal, which was good enough to get the funding conversation back on track. Eventually the project was funded, proved to be wildly successful (on time and under budget is always a good thing), and that particular Senior Exec got to fully realize the value of the portal in ways that had not previously been used in his organization. I still kick myself every once in a while for not having an “elevator speech” response prepared for the occasion.

How often do we question the value of the technologies we support?

An interesting aftereffect from that meeting, however, were that rumors of the conversation quickly spread throughout our IT organization. I can’t tell you how many times I got on an elevator with other IT professionals and, after a few moments of silence, one of them would turn to me and ask ”So…do we really need an Intranet?”.  We’d have a good laugh and part our separate ways on different floors.

To this day, I often reflect on the power of that simple question. The more I think about the situation, the more impressed I am with the fact that one person, in the midst of turbulent conversations had the courage to ask the simple question of “why”. Too often in IT, we press forward with technology, especially when it comes to legacy systems, without asking why we’re doing it. Sometimes we feel like we’re trapped by a proprietary platform, or maybe our end-users are resistant to change, so we simply pour money into costly upgrades or development efforts without raising our hand and asking “Why?” or “What is the alternative?”.  Different options always exist, so in these rough economic times, maybe it’s an ideal time to take a closer look at the technologies that are fueling your organization, compare them to the feature-functionality of new products, and determine whether a new product could actually do the job better for cheaper…or maybe whether you actually need the technology at all.

The second reason I often think about that situation has to do with a mindset of automatically assuming that the technology we advocate for is invaluable to the company. Regardless of whether your area of experience is Intranet, Business Intelligence, Data Warehousing, CRM, or any of the other IT realms, you need to be prepared for the question of “Why”. As your business partners begin to look for places to cut costs, reduce their overall application portfolio, or move to a Software as a Service (SaaS) model, you need to be able to realistically justify the technology you support.

To that end, here are my top 10 justifications for a corporate Intranet portal. I’d be very interested to hear additions that readers feel are important.

1. A centralized location for corporate communications – This is more important to larger organizations than it is to companies of 25 employees. The larger and more distributed the organization, the more important it is to the corporate culture to have a single place where all employees can go to find information on company strategies, announcements, HR information, and special activities.
2. Application and information aggregation - There is nothing more frustrating to employees than to have to open 15 different browser applications and 10 different application clients to find the information they need. Employees (especially those facing the customer) need to find information quickly and almost need the information to find them. Case in point, one of the more recent Intranets I worked with allowed the employees to look up a customer by name in the Intranet portal. The resulting page created a mashup of application information including links to the customers service contracts, open service tickets, and even a Google map of where the customer was located with the closest service technician shown on the map via an integration with a Global Information System (GIS) application. All of this information came from several different applications, mashed into a single view of relevant information.
3. Federated Search – A good Intranet portal offers a federated search model, allowing end-users to use a single, simple search interface to find information stored in a variety of applications. For instance, the portal should be able to leverage APIs from the corporate HR system, document management system, as well as CRM and ERP applications. The value of locating information stored in disparate systems makes a strong business process improvement case for the ROI of a portal.
4. Identity Management (aka “simpler sign-on”) – Modern portals provide a single point of entry to corporate applications and information, so they should either include an Identity Management (IdM) solution, or leverage a third party system. To ensure a high rate of user adoption, end-users should be required to authenticate as few times as necessary to support corporate security policies. This “simpler sign-on” schema reduces the number of times a user has to log in, saving time, and enhancing employee satisfaction.
5. Knowledge Management and Collaboration - Through the use of collaboration tools such as knowledge bases, Wikis, forums, chat rooms, or blogs, Intranet portals capture the corporate knowledge of how things get done. These collaborative tools ensure that commonly repeated solutions are captured in a searchable manner that can be discovered easily by future employees. In addition, these tools mitigate the danger of allowing knowledge to “walk out the door” when employees leave the company.
6. Decentralized Content Management – Intranet portals with integrated security and content management systems allow each department within the organization to manage their own content creation/management strategy. Long gone are the days where every article published to the portal had to be scoured and approved by a Content Manager in Corporate Communications. Instead, the Corp Comm group often establishes guidelines and best practices for the departments (and sometimes at the individual level) to follow. This allows for information to flow more freely within the organization and updates to the content to made in a more timely manner.
7. Organizational Transparency (aka “silo-busting”) - An added bonus to the decentralization of content management is a transparency factor. The more content that is published by each department, the better the chance that the rest of the company will gain an understanding of their goals and strategies. This helps drive cross-departmental communication, reduces the amount of overlapping work being done, and drives organizational collaboration.
8. Environmental Sustainability – More information stored in electronic format that is easily searchable naturally results in fewer file cabinets full of paper. Intranet portals can serve as document repositories for smaller companies and integrate with third party document management systems in larger organizations. The end result is less paper, and a better solution for the environment.
9. Employee Satisfaction – The easier information is to find, the more likely an employee will be able to resolve the business problems they face in their daily duties. Whether it’s locating customer information in order to resolve a customer issue, or locating research information that the employee can leverage in their next presentation, the more business information that is available throughout the organization, the better decisions employees can make in their jobs and the more successful they will be.
10. Customer Satisfaction – Last, but by no means least, is customer satisfaction. By centralizing information and providing access to federated search tools, customer-facing employees can reduce the amount of time it takes to locate customer information and can make better business decisions that reduce call handling times, increase first-call resolution in call centers, and lead to upsell opportunities that provide customers with enhanced services that meet their needs.

Sean R. Nicholson

Over the last few years, the term “Enterprise Content Management” (ECM) has become a term familiar to those working in the Intranet, Web, or Knowledge/Information Management sectors. The difficulty lies in the fact that, while the term is easy to toss around, the actual definition of what is expected to be encompassed by ECM continues to evolve. As a result, ECM to a Records Manager often means something very different than what ECM means to a Web Developer. In an attempt to more accurately define ECM, this article deconstructs the term into a variety of subcomponents that are commonly included in discussions about ECM.

Core Functionality for ECM

Recently, when conducting a search for an ECM solution for a Fortune 500 organization, the following core requirements were set forth as required elements to participate in the selection process. These core components provided a basis for what was expected to be included in an ECM offering:

• Document Management (DM) – Centralization of millions of documents was core to the functionality of this particular business and document management is probably the most consistent component in the definition of ECM. In this case, the DM system was required to have a browser-based folder view of the repository as well as check-in/check-out document collaboration, robust full-text searching, and the ability to secure documents at the organizational, folder, and document level. In addition, the solution required full auditing capabilities of each user and object within the repository. Finally, integration with the enterprise email system, while not required, was favorable.
• Web Content Management (WCM) – Although the goal of this particular RFP was to select a content management system (CMS) for an Intranet portal, the principles were the same as the selection of a Web Content Management System.  The solution had to include a “What You See Is What You Get” (WYSIWYG) rich text editor that allowed content creators and managers to easily edit and permission content. In addition, the solution had to offer the ability to schedule content for future publication.
• Records Management (RM) – To comply with the corporate retention schedules, the RFP required that the selected solution provide Records Management functionality that included the ability to schedule the review and destruction of items marked as corporate records. The ideal solution would allow for the creation of a variety of retention categories that allow for the movement of corporate records from real-time storage, to secondary, and eventually tertiary storage as the lifecycle of the record progressed.
• E-Discovery Tools – With E-Discovery weighing heavily on the minds of corporate attorneys everywhere, it was required that the selected solution provide the ability to locate content based on keyword searches or metadata and place those documents or records on legal hold for review. These documents, while in hold status, would be exempt from the records retention/destruction policies. In this case, the E-Discovery tools were only required to access content and not data. The distinction is that the ECM tools were focused on content stored in document and portal/Web content repositories and not in application databases such as customer relationship management (CRM) solutions or billing systems.
• Enteprise Search Integration – To provide a single search interface to users, the solution was required to provide search integration through an Application Programming Interface (API) using the Web Services Definition Language (WSDL) or other suitable messaging platform. The implication was that users should be able to search many sources of content using a search interface integrated into the corporate portal.

Just to participate in the selection process, each vendor was required to demonstrate that they offered the above functionality. That doesn’t mean, however, that these five elements completely defined ECM for that organization. Even after the solution was selected and implemented, the definition of ECM continued to evolve as users identified new content types and needs. Discussions of blogs, Wikis, and digital assets identified new potential content and required the reshaping of how content would be captured, stored, and governed. As this evolution progressed, several additional components were added to the organizational definition of ECM.

Secondary Functionality For ECM

• Transactional Content Management – Activities such as claims scanning and processing, invoice processing, and human resources employee packet processing all require that data be captured via scanning or electronic methods, and processed through a workflow until completed.
• Business Process Management - Activities that require documents or content to be passed through a workflow needed to be automated using a business process management tool. These tools allow the Business Process Owner to lay out the business process in a graphical manner and then create worflow rules that govern the routing of the document or content to various roles in the organization. The classic example is that of the content creator/editor/approver. The content creator creates the content and then routes the content item to the editor queue for editing and review. Once the content is edited, the editor forwards the content item to the approver for final review and publication.
• Digital Asset Management – In this age of digital media, the protection of electronic assets such as coporate logos, images, videos, and audio files is becoming of increasing concern to organizations. Digital Asset Management (DAM) systems focus on securing and protecting those assessts, restricting whether they can be used, duplicated, or altered by users and tracking when those activities occur.
• Knowledge Management – Knowledgebases, Wikis, blogs, microblogs, forums, and mashups are surfacing more frequently in the enterprise and the content created by their authors is key to capturing information once trapped inside each employees head. Using these tools, content authors can share their experiences and understanding of the organization. Each comes with its own challenge, however, as the content is often controlled by the creator and often has not review process.

Clearly, to this organization the definition of Enterprise Content Management went far beyond the ability to simply store a document in a centralized location and locate it when necessary. Just as in this example, organizations are continually being challenged to define what should be included in their Enterprise Content Management solution. As new types of content are identified, the need to store, secure, and locate them becomes more and more crucial to business operations. As a result, the definition of ECM will continue to evolve and the solutions offered to manage these content types will be required to either specialize in specific aspects of the content or grow to become all-incluse of the various content types.