Real world records management in SharePoint 2013
•Als PPTX, PDF herunterladen•
3 gefällt mir•2,626 views
Empfohlen
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Was ist angesagt?
Was ist angesagt? (20)
Andere mochten auch
Andere mochten auch (9)
Ähnlich wie Real world records management in SharePoint 2013
Ähnlich wie Real world records management in SharePoint 2013 (20)
Mehr von C/D/H Technology Consultants
Mehr von C/D/H Technology Consultants (20)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
Real world records management in SharePoint 2013
- 1. Real World ECM and ERM in SharePoint 2013 Inge Rush, CPA IngeR@cdh.com Detroit ARMA Chapter Meeting June 4, 2014
- 3. Agenda: SharePoint for ECM/ERM • Why SharePoint for ECM/ERM • Features • Challenges and limitations • How to make it work
- 4. Why SharePoint for ECM/RM? • Cost • Integration
- 5. Cost of SharePoint vs. Enterprise ECM/ERM Competitors • SharePoint is often already owned for other purposes • Cost of eDiscovery can be lower for covered content • Cost of required add-ons is usually either comparable or less than that for similar components of competitor suites.
- 6. 2009 Price Comparison EMC/ Documentum OpenText Alfresco SharePoint 100 Users $129,078 $196,794 $18,500 $24,669 1000 Users $863,937 $637,304 $46,250 $318,738 • 2009 figures from a comparison done by Alfresco • These are first year costs with maintenance/software assurance • Compares cost for “Document Management, Collaboration and Web Content Management” • No ERM features included in EMC, OpenText or Alfresco quotes • No Office integration included in any of the other quotes. • By the way: Do you already own SharePoint?
- 7. Example third party licensing costs eDocs DM vs. SharePoint DM with MacroView - Cost Comparison Products Licensing Cost Annually/1 Time Cost Now Yearly cost eDocs DM Licensing Costs eDocs DM standard user licenses ($813.15/user) x 30 $23,394.50 one time $23,394 eDocs DM extensions for SharePoint ($173.75/user) x 100 $17,375 one time $17,375 eDocs DM standard user maintenance ($162.63/user) x 30 $4,878.90 annually $4,878 eDocs DM extensions for SharePoint-maintenance ($34.75/user) x 100* $3,475 annually $3,475 Total $48,123 $8,353 SharePoint DM Licensing Costs MacroView DMF – Software Assurance licensing 3 server farms and 30 users $8,670 one time $8,670 Software Assurance $1,416 annually $1,734 $1,734 Total $10,404 $1,734 *eDocs DM extension for SharePoint required by all users who view documents through eDocs on SharePoint (currently 100 user licenses). MacroView DMF client required for all users who actively profile documents, but documents are accessible for other users in SharePoint directly without additional charge.
- 8. “But other ECM providers offer everything in one package” This is not accurate. Here’s why: • Most vendors offering a “complete solution” built it by acquiring makers of enhancements to their product. Often these acquisitions haven’t been fully absorbed— with separate code bases, revision cycles and support organizations. • In most cases, additional functionality such as ERM features are priced in addition to the core product. • All the vendors provide SharePoint add-ins—so if you are using SharePoint at all for documents, you can’t avoid integration.
- 9. SharePoint’s integration advantage • Best built-in integration with the rest of the Microsoft product line. –Office (Word/Excel/PowerPoint) –Outlook –Microsoft Exchange –Microsoft CRM –SQL Reporting Services/Analysis Services • SharePoint is so ubiquitous that most other enterprise server applications support integration with it.
- 10. SharePoint ECM and ERM Features
- 11. ECM, ERM and eDiscovery in SharePoint: A Brief History • SharePoint 2007 –Check-out/versions –Basic Records Center (silo)
- 12. • SharePoint 2010 ECM Features –Managed Metadata (enterprise-wide controlled vocabulary) –Content type syndication (enterprise-wide document types and policies) –Column default values –Document Set content types –Increased scale • Very large libraries and lists (up to 10,000,000 items) ECM, ERM and eDiscovery in SharePoint: A Brief History
- 13. ECM, ERM and eDiscovery in SharePoint: A Brief History • More on SharePoint 2010 ERM –Unique document IDs –Multi-stage disposition –In-place holds and records, BUT with limitations
- 14. • Search –Continuous crawl –Entity extraction • User interface improvements –Drag and drop filing –Bulk editing • Shredded Storage (i.e. only version deltas are stored) SharePoint 2013 ECM Improvements
- 15. SharePoint 2013 ERM Features • Declaring records • Retention policies • Content organizer • Legal holds
- 16. Retention Policies • Based on multiple factors –Content type –Library –Folder (Important for robust file plans)
- 18. Declaring Records • SharePoint potentially lets anyone declare a record • Records can be declared • Manually • By policy • By custom workflow • In-Place • Send to a Records Center • Move, copy or leave a link
- 19. Content Organizer • AKA: File Plan –Rules to file document in libraries and by folders matching metadata values • Requires matching content types –value of content type syndication • Folders can have retention policies set automatically with some PowerShell or event receivers.
- 22. Where SharePoint Fits in eDiscovery
- 23. What SharePoint 2013 Brings to eDiscovery • eDiscovery Center –Search to hold and refine –eDiscovery export • Content can be changed while held • Exchange and Lync included • File servers too*
- 24. How Microsoft Does eDiscovery: Pre-SharePoint 2013
- 25. How Microsoft Does eDiscovery: Post SharePoint 2013
- 26. Real World ECM and ERM with SharePoint
- 27. Challenges and Pitfalls of using SharePoint for ECM/ERM • SharePoint technical limits • ERM-specific limitations
- 28. SharePoint 2013 Technical Limits: The List View Threshold List Views and Folders Limited to 5000 items • Issue Details: – Biggest issue from RM perspective: misleading/missing results – Not corrected by paging the results. – Affects most list views—even if the columns are indexed. • How to address it: – Use the Metadata Navigation feature. – Train users to understand the issue. – Develop Search-based approaches.
- 29. SharePoint 2013 Technical Limits File Size Limit Cannot upload files larger than 2GB • Issue Details: – Primarily a SQL limitation – No web-based system could handle this size without a lot of tweaking. – Note: Remote Blob Storage doesn’t fix this. • How to address it: – Compress files. – Store larger files elsewhere with links. – Realize how rare a file larger than 2GB really is.
- 30. Records management limitations • No intuitive file plan builder • No built-in event-driven disposition • Lacking built-in physical records management features • Not DOD 5015.02 ERM certified.
- 31. SharePoint-native approach to overcome file plan limitations • Create a complex file plan by customizing the content organizer feature. 1. Design a file plan and represent it in SharePoint with Records Centers, content types, and content organizer rules that create folders based on metadata. (“Out of the Box” functionality) • Business-based content types may not match your archival requirements 2. Create additional rules within these content types by adding a “Record Type” column and creating separate rules for each. 3. Add event receivers to: • Define additional metadata automatically in the records center folders (Location-Based Metadata). • Define folder-level information management policies
- 32. Third party options • Gimmal (http://www.gimmal.com) • RSD (http://www.rsd.com) • Collabware (http://www.collabware.com)
- 33. Closing thoughts
- 34. Why do records management projects fail? • Lack of alignment with business goals and business model … make it “frictionless” • Failure to integrate with business processes and IT systems • Failure to answer the user’s question: “What’s in it for me?”
- 35. The solution • Make your System of Record a System of Engagement –Don’t create a records silo; integrate it with day to day processes. –Define document types that make sense for users, not just records managers. “It is simply not realistic to expect broad sets of employees to navigate extensive classification options while referring to a records schedule that may weigh in at more than 100 pages.” Forrester Research/ARMA International Survey
- 36. • Knowledge Management Solution for a Major US Accounting Firm • Extranet Document Repository for a Large US Accounting Firm • Enterprise Taxonomy and Search Design at a Global Manufacturing Company • Massive Records Repository for a Financial Services Firm C/D/H ECM Case Studies www.cdh.com/whatwedo
- 37. Detroit 1500 Woodward Ave Suite 400 Detroit, MI 48226 (248) 546-1800 Grand Rapids 15 Ionia Ave SW Suite 270 Grand Rapids, MI 49503 (616) 776-1600 Thank You www.cdh.com
Hinweis der Redaktion
- Covered Content – Content is responsive to discovery requests
- Bullet 2 – focus on 3rd Party products, such as SAP APIs, etc.
- Users prevented from working on a held document Holds limited to SharePoint content Configured by site collection Based on content type (document type) only
- Entity Extractions: provide Dictionary for a category (e.g. City) (provide a dictionary w/city names and abbreviations it will find its place entry in search index))
- Content Organizer – typically called a “File Plan”
- In SP this is called an “Information Management Policy” Focus on having policies for non-records and records and multi-stage disposition (i.e. recycle after 3; review after 2)
- Security Driven / Permission
- Content Type Syndication required to help ensure the content type used for the file plan is available in both source and destination locations
- *For export only (cannot hold it or otherwise enforce any policies … findable if indexed)
- How does SP help make eDiscovery easier and less expense: The next 2 slides will demonstrate the improvements
- Export format “EDRMS” - Electronic Discovery Reference Model
- Point 1: Real World isn’t perfect Point 2: You may want to consider working with someone who has some experience
- Why the LVT can create misleading results: if the threshold is exceeded, SharePoint automatically trims the results to show the most recent 5000 items by Created date. But if you are sorting by Modified date descending for example, recently modified items that were created before the most recent 5000 will not appear.
- Remote Blob Storage doesn’t fix this: If you’ve heard of RBS, which is the feature of SharePoint that allows large files to be externalized from the SQL content database, you may have heard or thought that this would address either the LVT or the 2GB limit. Neither is true. Realize how rare a 2GB file is: Generally, this will either be compressed file image like an ISO, or it will be a database of some kind. Lesson: Don’t store a database inside another database
- Record Types are available in other Records Management Systems By creating a “Record Type” column that aligns with archival and other RM policies we can meet Organizational Record Management Rules – this would be likely across various content types on a completely different criteria and could potentially be defaulted based on library or site, etc.