SharePoint Success Now Ensured
April 12, 2009
his headline grabbed my attention: “Information Architected Inc. Releases New Methodology to Ensure SharePoint Success” here. The item is a news release from Information Architected Inc., a “consultancy focused on the intelligent use of content, knowledge and processes to drive innovation and thrive in a digital world.” Here’s what the news release said about the methodology:
The methodology is executed in three stages. It begins with an assessment of overall business goals and objectives. It identifies and ranks the business issues associated with the SharePoint implementation, expected outcomes and benefits targeted. The assessment includes a rationalization of the needs for collaboration and knowledge sharing versus the needs for compliance and security. It also examines user work habits, the need to collaborate, search and navigation habits and needs, related processes and overall business goals and objectives.
The second step looks at current and planned technology strategies. This includes everything from network capacity, to existing and planned tools and techniques for collaboration. This can include existing portals, document and content management systems, enterprise 2.0 technologies, and any existing SharePoint sites.
The third step aligns the findings of the first two steps, resulting in an implementation strategy that balances technology capabilities with business requirements. Alternatives are presented that highlight alternative cost and change management issues associated with the SharePoint implementation. For each targeted goal or benefit, alternatives regarding deployment in SharePoint “out of the box integration of SharePoint with existing systems, customization of SharePoint and/or simple tweaks of SharePoint are compared. The solution is positioned within an information architecture, ensuring easier and wider scale adoption and alignment with corporate governance. The result is a well thought out business-technology strategy that maximizes the value derived from SharePoint and minimizes any risks of shortcomings in the short and long-term.
That’s fine but the buzzword density is a bit high for this addled goose’s taste.
What stopped me was the implication that whatever methodology existed prior to the release of Information Architected’s method must be flawed. I pondered the implications of 100 million SharePoint installations less successful than their users originally anticipated. I have been baffled by SharePoint, which is a snowball type of server from Microsoft. Each year SharePoint picks up more functions which are often mashed into the server product, but not fully integrated. What began life as a content management system, now operates like a Universal home gym. One big, heavy structure that can be used like a gymful of exercise equipment. I hope the new method that “ensures” success gets traction. Mud wrestling with SharePoint can be hazardous to one’s standing in the eyes of colleagues. And search? Make friends with the chief financial officer too.
Stephen Arnold, April 12, 2009
Comments
4 Responses to “SharePoint Success Now Ensured”
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
I am not a sharepoint architect, so please correct me if I am wrong.
I have tried designing a complex ECM solution based on sharepoint, and stumbled on missing features. I suspect sharepoint is not ECM.
1) AFAIK, a document stored in sharepoint has an identifier that reflects the folder where it is stored. so if it is moved to another directory – the identifier changes.
How can you manage documents when there is no unique id ? it is like a DB with no primary keys.
2) sharepoint does not have a strong notion of bi-directional links between documents. so if document A has a link to B, there is no guaranty that B points to A. Further – if B is removed, sharepoint does not take care of the dangling pointer.
This may be O.K. for web sites, not for ECM that is a basis for organizational processes.
This makes me think that sharepoint is a WCM on steroids, but not a good basis for organizations where documents are part of processes.
“Information Architected Inc.” believes that everything can be architected with with SharePoint. They seem like the proverbial guy with hammer, that will make everything look like a buzzword-compliant nail.
Head Scratcher,
SharePoint is a sticky wicket. The marketing pitch is magnetic. The reality is quite different as you have discovered.
Stephen Arnold, April 12, 2009
Anonymous cranks of the net unite…
@Head Scratcher – where in the press release or anywhere on our website do we claim “everything can be architected with SharePoint” and by implication, that everything SHOULD be?
Wouldn’t claim that in a million years, nor for a million dollars straight from Redmond.
The simple fact is that the biggest wave of ECM-related implementations in recent memory HAVE happened with SharePoint and will CONTINUE to be driven by SharePoint. A rolling stone gathers no moss – except when it already IS MOSS. Power laws, monopolies, and all that fun “market disruption” that happens when suddenly a single company with an incredible market reach is making more than most ECM companies have made in a decade.
Could anything be architected upon SharePoint? No doubt, as it can be extended a billion ways from Sunday. Should it? Absolutely not.
A portion of our methodology is used specifically to identify where you should not spend time, money or effort in getting SharePoint to perform tricks it was not meant to do, as well as in understanding where SharePoint plays *a* role in a larger system, whether as front-end, middleware or back-end, while other systems take on the roles that they are best suited for.
What our research and work with several hundred companies has shown is that, with exceptions of course, most companies are aiming fairly low with what they’re trying to do with SharePoint – and they are fine with that. Rather than buying the mythical “perfect” ECM solution, they are getting started with a solution that has acknowledged warts, from a provider they have no concerns will go out of business, even in the current economic climate. The slow engine of change coming from Microsoft will eventually fix existing problems and round out the solution set to be more complete – and in the meantime, the Microsoft ecosystem is among the largest of the world, like it or not.
Given that the vast majority of ECM licenses sold are hideously expensive shelfware (numbers range in the 80-90% of seats/licenses purchased are not used in a majority of cases), for companies to get near 100% use of ANY level of ECM functionality is a huge win in my opinion. And I say this with no particular love of Microsoft, otherwise.
To Stephen’s points:
Many SharePoint implementations have and will continue to fail to meet expectations because :
a. people are unable to untwist the marketing hype from the reality until they’re already well down the purchase, install and deploy path
b. they attempt to re-invent best (and worst) practices for ECM by stumbling through SharePoint, having had no experience with prior tools (even though ECM solutions have existed for near 20 years), and stall out their project due to user revolts, long project cycles and the other classic failing points of ECM
c. Someone or some group, whether within the business side or the technology (IT) side of the house insists that SharePoint is the way to go “because we’re a Microsoft shop” or “nobody ever got fired for going Microsoft” – regardless of whether SharePoint actually provided the best toolkit for the tasks at hand
And the list goes on… In short, most implementation methodologies fail because… most companies do not HAVE an implementation methodology.
What’s interesting about the SharePoint phenomenon, as well as the Google phenomenon (far behind Microsoft in the Enterprise BTW) is that none of these problems are new.
Thanks to Microsoft and Google, far more people are now vaguely aware of ECM/WCM/Search than had ever been, but being introduced to a concept and becoming masters relating that concept is so rare as to be non-existent. We can lament that not everyone is using the most cutting edge of solutions, but in the meantime, the mainstream is about to come along, and that is a major impact that’s in the process of hitting the industry.
Is SharePoint the ultimate solution that obliterates all others from the past and all potential alternatives in the future? Not a chance – but it is an absolute game changer and should not be dismissed out of hand.
“May you live in interesting times.”
Hi Dan.
I re-read your page. It is not about finding the right solution to ECM problems, but about fitting sharepoint as an enterprise solution, not about evaluating an enterprise needs, and selecting the right tools for the job.
in your comment, you say companies are looking for a solution “from a provider they have no concerns will go out of business”. I do not think either EMC nor IBM are less stable than Microsoft.
you believe “The slow engine of change coming from Microsoft will eventually fix existing problems”. some of those problems are deep architectural issues, not small fixes. like storing files in SQL server BLOBs. as opposed to most other ECM solutions, that (how surprisingly) store files as files. This makes it impossible to manage different content types on different storage devices. or on different geographic locations.
Things may be fixed, but a lot of plumbing will change, and things will be again incompatible with previous implementation. This will be good for consultants, as they will re-write the previouse solution.