1. Issue: What is the appropriate approach to ERM within a given context?
1.1. Solution 1: Dedicated EDRMS
1.1.1. Elements of Success
1.1.1.1. modular approach
1.1.1.2. EDRMS as final repository for records not in daily use
1.1.1.3. Web-based EDRMS
1.1.1.4. industry-specific solutions
1.1.1.5. application-specific solutions
1.1.1.6. complete, ‘fully worked up’ solutions
1.1.1.7. tight integration with office systems
1.1.1.8. integration with SharePoint
1.1.1.9. tight integration with business systems
1.1.1.10. good functionality
1.1.1.11. good usability
1.1.1.12. balance between functionality and usability
1.1.1.13. good user interface
1.1.1.14. familiar user interface - corporate desktop
1.1.1.15. intuitive user interface
1.1.1.16. user-friendly interface
1.1.1.17. accessibility – works with special needs applications
1.1.1.18. certification (e.g. The National Archives (TNA/PRO))
1.1.1.19. configurability
1.1.1.20. file-plan - user-agreed rather than imposed
1.1.1.21. file-plan - usable
1.1.1.22. file-plan - not complex
1.1.1.23. file-plan - easy to update
1.1.1.24. file-plan - easy to edit after installation
1.1.1.25. automatic metadata capture, where possible
1.1.1.26. performance meets targets (responsiveness)
1.1.1.27. scalability
1.1.1.28. search capability
1.1.2. Elements of Failure
1.1.2.1. lack of use of middleware
1.1.2.2. use of off-the-shelf products without considering degree of customisation required
1.1.2.3. requiring declaration of records by users
1.1.2.4. lack of ability to un-declare records after declaration
1.1.2.5. increasing time spent on simple tasks
1.1.2.6. lack of draft document area
1.1.2.7. excessively large folders
1.1.2.8. factors / reasons frequently non-technical
1.1.3. Characteristics of Individually Named EDRMS Products
1.1.3.1. Documentum
1.1.3.1.1. open architecture
1.1.3.1.2. modular approach
1.1.3.1.3. high functionality (possibly too high for ‘average’ contexts)
1.1.3.1.4. high complexity (possibly too high for ‘average’ contexts)
1.1.3.1.5. weak usability
1.1.3.1.6. excellent configuration
1.1.3.1.7. excellent scalability
1.1.3.1.8. excellent resilience
1.1.3.1.9. good BPM capability
1.1.3.1.10. extensive API catalogue
1.1.3.1.11. use more appropriate in highly regulated environment
1.1.3.1.12. not for ‘average’ user
1.1.3.2. LiveLink
1.1.3.2.1. good integration with office systems
1.1.3.2.2. right balance of functionality and usability
1.1.3.2.3. good user interface
1.1.3.3. Meridio
1.1.3.3.1. compliance with e-government standards
1.1.3.3.2. right balance of functionality and usability
1.1.3.3.3. good user interface
1.1.3.3.4. excellent integration with office systems
1.1.3.3.5. integration with SharePoint superfluous, as Meridio already integrates well with Microsoft products
1.1.3.3.6. integration with SharePoint works well
1.1.3.3.7. excellent scalability
1.1.3.3.8. merger with Autonomy provides additional capabilities
1.1.3.4. SharePoint for RM
1.1.3.4.1. weak architecture
1.1.3.4.2. weak functionality
1.1.3.4.3. good integration with Microsoft environment
1.1.3.4.4. weak integration of older versions with MS Office
1.1.3.4.5. weak integration with non-Microsoft environment
1.1.3.4.6. significant customisation required
1.1.3.5. SharePoint front end to EDRMS (generic)
1.1.3.5.1. cheap solution
1.1.3.5.2. weak information architecture
1.1.3.5.3. good RM/DM capability
1.1.3.5.4. good search
1.1.3.5.5. good portal
1.1.3.5.6. good workflow capability
1.1.3.5.7. weak scalability
1.1.3.5.8. weak integration with IT systems
1.1.3.6. TRIM
1.1.3.6.1. TNA approval
1.1.3.6.2. excellent configuration
1.1.3.6.3. good integration with office systems
1.1.3.6.4. good user interface
1.1.4. Does this solution apply to my sector?
1.1.4.1. Public
1.1.4.1.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.1.4.1.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.1.4.2. Private (large)
1.1.4.2.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.1.4.2.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.1.4.3. Private (SME)
1.1.4.3.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.1.4.3.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.1.4.4. Not-for-profit
1.1.4.4.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.1.4.4.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.1.5. Does this solution apply to my industry?
1.1.5.1. Construction
1.1.5.1.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.1.5.1.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.1.5.2. Education
1.1.5.2.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.1.5.2.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.1.5.3. Energy, utilities and infrastructure
1.1.5.3.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.1.5.3.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.1.5.4. Finance
1.1.5.4.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.1.5.4.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.1.5.5. Government (incl. police, armed services)
1.1.5.5.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.1.5.5.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.1.5.6. Health
1.1.5.6.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.1.5.6.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.1.5.7. Manufacturing
1.1.5.7.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.1.5.7.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.1.5.8. Pharmaceutical industry
1.1.5.8.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.1.5.8.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.1.5.9. Service industries
1.1.5.9.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.1.5.9.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.1.5.10. Other
1.1.5.10.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.1.5.10.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.2. Solution 2: Using Existing Functionality in Line of Business, Office and Mobile Systems
1.2.1. Methods for Encouraging Use
1.2.1.1. promotion by organisations
1.2.1.2. IT can configure system defaults to remove burden from end-users (IT need to be educated in this)
1.2.2. Elements of Failure
1.2.2.1. SharePoint does not integrate with older versions of MS Office
1.2.2.2. organisations prefer basic, cheap RM capability (e.g. NT FileStore folders)
1.2.2.3. full potential of systems not used by organisations
1.2.2.4. use is not strategically driven
1.2.2.5. use is driven by individuals / business units
1.2.2.6. users do not exploit functionality of systems
1.2.2.7. users see metadata capture as causing extra work and therefore avoid systems that require it
1.2.3. Examples of ‘Systems’ in actual use
1.2.3.1. Rudimentary document management systems, e.g. using a combination of shared network drives, file-plans and Windows Explorer access control features
1.2.3.2. Shared drives as ‘EDRMS’
1.2.3.3. Intranet as ‘EDRMS’
1.2.3.4. Custom dashboard for MS Outlook, e.g. organising emails in functional folders, enabling selection by users of end of email threads for records capture
1.2.3.5. Office systems - document templates
1.2.3.6. Office systems - custom metadata
1.2.3.7. Office systems - track changes
1.2.3.8. Office systems - property screens
1.2.4. Does this solution apply to my sector?
1.2.4.1. Public
1.2.4.1.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.2.4.1.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.2.4.2. Private (large)
1.2.4.2.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.2.4.2.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.2.4.3. Private (SME)
1.2.4.3.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.2.4.3.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.2.4.4. Not-for-profit
1.2.4.4.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.2.4.4.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.2.5. Does this solution apply to my industry?
1.2.5.1. Construction
1.2.5.1.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.2.5.1.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.2.5.2. Education
1.2.5.2.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.2.5.2.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.2.5.3. Energy, utilities and infrastructure
1.2.5.3.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.2.5.3.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.2.5.4. Finance
1.2.5.4.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.2.5.4.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.2.5.5. Government (incl. police, armed services)
1.2.5.5.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.2.5.5.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.2.5.6. Health
1.2.5.6.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.2.5.6.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.2.5.7. Manufacturing
1.2.5.7.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.2.5.7.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.2.5.8. Pharmaceutical industry
1.2.5.8.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.2.5.8.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.2.5.9. Service industries
1.2.5.9.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.2.5.9.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.2.5.10. Other
1.2.5.10.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.2.5.10.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.3. Solution 3: Embedding RM functionality in Line of Business, Office and Mobile Systems
1.3.1. Elements of success
1.3.1.1. appropriate use (i.e., for some systems / some information only)
1.3.1.2. most financial systems (e.g. SAP) have embedded RM functionality
1.3.1.3. embedded RM functionality in line-of-business systems provides basic RM capability
1.3.1.4. XML-based archiving systems for raw content enables re-purposing but lacks RM functionality (e.g. EMC Corp)
1.3.1.5. email archiving systems have basic RM capability
1.3.2. Takeover of EDRMS providers by major IT systems providers
1.3.2.1. Elements of success
1.3.2.1.1. major systems providers get increased awareness of the needs of RM professionals)
1.3.2.1.2. example of successful outcome - Autonomy takeover of Meridio
1.3.2.1.3. enhanced ERM capability and great potential for integration and automation potential, e.g. combination of email systems (Zantaz) and EMC Corp
1.3.2.2. Elements of Failure
1.3.2.2.1. major systems providers lack understanding of business processes
1.3.2.2.2. major systems providers lack understanding of RM
1.3.2.2.3. lack of ability to integrate different systems - excessive gaps, e.g. Oracle, EMC Corp, Stellent
1.3.3. Does this solution apply to my sector?
1.3.3.1. Public
1.3.3.1.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.3.3.1.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.3.3.2. Private (large)
1.3.3.2.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.3.3.2.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.3.3.3. Private (SME)
1.3.3.3.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.3.3.3.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.3.3.4. Not-for-profit
1.3.3.4.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.3.3.4.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.3.4. Does this solution apply to my industry?
1.3.4.1. Construction
1.3.4.1.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.3.4.1.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.3.4.2. Education
1.3.4.2.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.3.4.2.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.3.4.3. Energy, utilities and infrastructure
1.3.4.3.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.3.4.3.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.3.4.4. Finance
1.3.4.4.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.3.4.4.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.3.4.5. Government (incl. police, armed services)
1.3.4.5.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.3.4.5.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.3.4.6. Health
1.3.4.6.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.3.4.6.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.3.4.7. Manufacturing
1.3.4.7.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.3.4.7.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.3.4.8. Pharmaceutical industry
1.3.4.8.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.3.4.8.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.3.4.9. Service industries
1.3.4.9.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.3.4.9.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.3.4.10. Other
1.3.4.10.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.3.4.10.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.4. Solution 4: Integrating EDRMS with other corporate IT systems
1.4.1. Elements of success
1.4.1.1. all EDRMS integrate reasonably well with MS Office
1.4.1.2. use EDRMS as back end file store with as many line-of-business systems as possible
1.4.1.3. database systems integrated with EDRMS: process-related documents and document-related data storage in EDRMS
1.4.1.4. SharePoint front end with EDRMS back end
1.4.2. Elements of Failure
1.4.2.1. most EDRMS lack integration
1.4.2.2. most EDRMS lack interoperability
1.4.2.3. poor EDRMS integration with other IT systems
1.4.2.4. lack of products
1.4.2.5. web interface preferred by vendors; thick client interface preferred by users
1.4.2.6. licensing costs
1.4.3. Prerequisites for integration
1.4.3.1. development of other IT systems, e.g. using XML
1.4.3.2. other IT systems with compatible software versions
1.4.3.3. expensive programming
1.4.3.4. huge amount of technical support
1.4.3.5. Office systems - document templates
1.4.3.6. Office systems - custom metadata
1.4.4. Does this solution apply to my sector?
1.4.4.1. Public
1.4.4.1.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.4.4.1.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.4.4.2. Private (large)
1.4.4.2.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.4.4.2.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.4.4.3. Private (SME)
1.4.4.3.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.4.4.3.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.4.4.4. Not-for-profit
1.4.4.4.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.4.4.4.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.4.5. Does this solution apply to my industry?
1.4.5.1. Construction
1.4.5.1.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.4.5.1.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.4.5.2. Education
1.4.5.2.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.4.5.2.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.4.5.3. Energy, utilities and infrastructure
1.4.5.3.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.4.5.3.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.4.5.4. Finance
1.4.5.4.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.4.5.4.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.4.5.5. Government (incl. police, armed services)
1.4.5.5.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.4.5.5.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.4.5.6. Health
1.4.5.6.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.4.5.6.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.4.5.7. Manufacturing
1.4.5.7.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.4.5.7.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.4.5.8. Pharmaceutical industry
1.4.5.8.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.4.5.8.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.4.5.9. Service industries
1.4.5.9.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.4.5.9.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.4.5.10. Other
1.4.5.10.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.4.5.10.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.5. Solution 5: A combination of approaches
1.5.1. Elements of success
1.5.1.1. build bespoke middleware, e.g. with XML
1.5.1.2. APIs (application programming interfaces) within EDRMS
1.5.1.3. event models within EDRMS
1.5.1.4. workflow tools
1.5.1.5. legacy information systems plus repositories
1.5.1.6. manage OCR documents with OCR applications (e.g. Omnipage) with storage in EDRMS (e.g. Hummingbird)
1.5.1.7. hybrid systems to track physical records, e.g. Iron Mountain Connect, SharePoint
1.5.2. Elements of Failure
1.5.2.1. combined ERM approach rare
1.5.2.2. implementation expense exceeds expectations, e.g. SharePoint
1.5.2.3. implementation at departmental level
1.5.2.4. lack of analysis of gaps between current and future configuration
1.5.2.5. lack of awareness of requirements for change management by organisation
1.5.2.6. lack of investment in change management by organisation
1.5.2.7. EDRMS licensing costs
1.5.2.8. cost of integration
1.5.3. Requirements for implementation
1.5.3.1. strategic-level planning
1.5.3.2. analysis of requirements
1.5.3.3. use for well-defined processes
1.5.3.4. central role for EDRMS, replacement of existing systems in organisation
1.5.4. Does this solution apply to my sector?
1.5.4.1. Public
1.5.4.1.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.5.4.1.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.5.4.2. Private (large)
1.5.4.2.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.5.4.2.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.5.4.3. Private (SME)
1.5.4.3.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.5.4.3.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.5.4.4. Not-for-profit
1.5.4.4.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.5.4.4.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.5.5. Does this solution apply to my industry?
1.5.5.1. Construction
1.5.5.1.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.5.5.1.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.5.5.2. Education
1.5.5.2.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.5.5.2.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.5.5.3. Energy, utilities and infrastructure
1.5.5.3.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.5.5.3.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.5.5.4. Finance
1.5.5.4.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.5.5.4.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.5.5.5. Government (incl. police, armed services)
1.5.5.5.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.5.5.5.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.5.5.6. Health
1.5.5.6.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.5.5.6.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.5.5.7. Manufacturing
1.5.5.7.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.5.5.7.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.5.5.8. Pharmaceutical industry
1.5.5.8.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.5.5.8.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.5.5.9. Service industries
1.5.5.9.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.5.5.9.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.5.5.10. Other
1.5.5.10.1. Is the solution highly desirable?
1.5.5.10.2. Is the solution likely to happen?
1.6. Other
1.6.1. Elements of success
1.6.1.1. a
1.6.1.2. b
1.6.1.3. c
1.6.1.4. d
1.6.1.5. e
1.6.1.6. f
1.6.1.7. g
1.6.2. Elements of Failure
1.6.2.1. a
1.6.2.2. b
1.6.2.3. c
1.6.2.4. d
1.6.2.5. e
1.6.2.6. f
1.6.2.7. g
1.6.3. [Here's one you made earlier]
1.6.3.1. a
1.6.3.2. b
1.6.3.3. c
1.6.3.4. d
1.6.4. Does this solution apply to my sector?
1.6.4.1. Public
1.6.4.1.1. Proposition (a)
1.6.4.1.2. Proposition (b)
1.6.4.1.3. Proposition (c)
1.6.4.2. Private (large)
1.6.4.2.1. Proposition (a)
1.6.4.2.2. Proposition (b)
1.6.4.2.3. Proposition (c)
1.6.4.3. Private (SME)
1.6.4.3.1. Proposition (a)
1.6.4.3.2. Proposition (b)
1.6.4.3.3. Proposition (c)
1.6.4.4. Not-for-profit
1.6.4.4.1. Proposition (a)
1.6.4.4.2. Proposition (b)
1.6.4.4.3. Proposition (c)
1.6.5. Does this solution apply to my industry?
1.6.5.1. Construction
1.6.5.1.1. Proposition (a)
1.6.5.1.2. Proposition (b)
1.6.5.1.3. Proposition (c)
1.6.5.2. Education
1.6.5.2.1. Proposition (a)
1.6.5.2.2. Proposition (b)
1.6.5.2.3. Proposition (c)
1.6.5.3. Energy, utilities and infrastructure
1.6.5.3.1. Proposition (a)
1.6.5.3.2. Proposition (b)
1.6.5.3.3. Proposition (c)
1.6.5.4. Finance
1.6.5.4.1. Proposition (a)
1.6.5.4.2. Proposition (b)
1.6.5.4.3. Proposition (c)
1.6.5.5. Government (incl. police, armed services)
1.6.5.5.1. Proposition (a)
1.6.5.5.2. Proposition (b)
1.6.5.5.3. Proposition (c)
1.6.5.6. Health
1.6.5.6.1. Proposition (a)
1.6.5.6.2. Proposition (b)
1.6.5.6.3. Proposition (c)
1.6.5.7. Manufacturing
1.6.5.7.1. Proposition (a)
1.6.5.7.2. Proposition (b)
1.6.5.7.3. Proposition (c)
1.6.5.8. Pharmaceutical industry
1.6.5.8.1. Proposition (a)
1.6.5.8.2. Proposition (b)
1.6.5.8.3. Proposition (c)
1.6.5.9. Service industries
1.6.5.9.1. Proposition (a)
1.6.5.9.2. Proposition (b)
1.6.5.9.3. Proposition (c)
1.6.5.10. Other
1.6.5.10.1. Proposition (a)
1.6.5.10.2. Proposition (b)
1.6.5.10.3. Proposition (c)