I noticed when registering at mySPC the high number of sessions tagged as ECM (27, I believe). Unusual for a conference *not* devoted to enterprise content management or knowledge management, this was the single highest session type (the other high tag numbers were for roles such as Developer, Architect, Administrator) but the ontology and taxonomy of the sessions pointed to the meta-taxonomy and importance of ECM to the SharePoint 2010 platform.
I was thrilled to see this on two counts:
1) The number one request from clients is for Enterprise Content Management. They may not always articulate this (it usually is expressed as “document management” or “we need to find things”) but I have never had an engagement that did NOT have ECM as the #1 pain point and chief indicator of ROI for end users
2) ECM is not usually at the forefront of technology conferences in general, nor SharePoint conferences in particular. Usually relegated to a special interest session or its own conferences, it is the elephant in the room when it comes to collaborative technologies
Several of us in the enterprise architecture and SharePoint space have tried to meet to discuss these heady topics at various past events but realized that while #SharePints and conference parties are excellent standalone ventures, they do not lend themselves to deeper or more structured discussions of information architecture, ontology or ECM. Hallway chats have the advantage of serendipity but are difficult to sustain long term.
After SharePoint Saturday DC, Brian Seitz, Richard Harbridge and Ruven Gotz and me decided after failed attempts to meet that we would pull together a SharePoint Salon devoted to issues of information architecture at SPC11. Brian spearheaded the organization of the salon (or working group) in the tradition of the great 17th century intellectual circles.
While we eschewed powdered wigs, satin breeches and ungodly decollete in favor of 21st century international hotel fare and conference attire, the effect was the same: pleasant company, scintillating discussion and a meeting of the minds that engendered civil discourse, debate and deep dives into problems of information architecture in SharePoint deployments.
ShareSalon Members: Ruven Gotz, Susan Hanley, Silvana Nani, Owen Allen, Richard Harbridge, Brian Seitz, Michal Pisarek, Jill Kunkel and me:
Some of the main takeaways from this discussion are:
1) ECM and IA are the critical success factors for end users but often neglected in deployment planning
2) SharePoint technical teams (usually admins and devs) have little to no experience with ECM and are often not qualified to do the IA work (business analysis, ontology, taxonomy, as well as UI/UX) needed
3) Good information architecture is a result of proper enterprise architecture planning. EA is of course often neglected by organizations, especially if the CIO role is more tactical rather than strategic. EA is also often considered slideware and can be academic if not operationalized – consultants with expertise in TOGAF’s business architecture and information architecture phases are critical, but all too often the role of the architect is translated as the infrastructure architect (although that phase comes later in TOGAF’s cycle as technology architecture)
4) “Governance” is often misinterpreted as maintenance or infrastructure rules of the game (such as “maximum size allotted to MySites”). While those factors are critical, governance is really a natural outcome of propoer EA and IA planning and encompasses many other elements such as organizational strategy and structure, enterprise information strategy, taxonomies and business processes. SharePoint “governance” should be a subset of larger enterprise IT governance and should not be an end unto itself.
It was heartening to see the high number of sessions devoted to ECM at SPC11 – this pointed to a normalization of ECM within the SharePoint lifecycle, as well as the maturity of the platform. Also heartening to see was the number of vendors devoted to ECM, social computing, search and WCM – while the technical aspects of SharePoint administration, infrastructure and development are not to be discounted, in reality the end user really doesn’t give a hoot about InfoPath, web parts or event receivers. Finding the document with the notes from last week’s meeting are what matters – it was great to see that the ecosystem has internalized these needs and taken them from “special interest” to “mainstream.”
For more information, see Brian Seitz’ blog post on #ShareSalon as well as my #SPSTCDC presentation on enterprise architecture planning and SharePoint governance:
http://briankseitz.wordpress.com/2011/10/03/373/
Enterprise Architecture Planning: 3 Things You Need to Know About SharePoint Governance
