On 3/3/06, Charmaine Brooks <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> About the "pretenders" - I think we have all spoken with a vendor that
> didn't know the first thing about RIM.


In the past, I'd have to agree with you.  BUT, they're getting much smarter
and they're becoming much better informed, for the most part, because of
folks LIKE US who said enuff is enuff and started rebuffing their sales
pitches with facts and in part because of the need to actually demonstrate
the claims being made were true.

The document management vendors helped create the mess we are facing, by
> telling IT to just image everything and they'll be heros.


YEAH... BUT... (and it's a BIG but!)  Our management has also been a
culprit, for failing to value the services provided by RIM and to invite us
to the table when they decide to throw money at problems they haven't taken
the time to analyze.  I'm not trying to throw up a shield for "all vendors"
here... but c'mon... VENDORS VEND, it's what they do.  If our organizations
are STUPID ENOUGH to buy something without understanding what they need or
want it to do, then the blame should be shared.    And it can be said that
we aren't doing a good enough job of selling or communicating the value we
add, but we're a business function... shouldn't those who manage the
functions understand what they do???

None of them listened as we tried to tell them they are only trading one
> media (paper) for another (electronic - tape, hard drives, CD's, etc). The
> proliferation of paper documents with the invention of the copier is nothing
> compared to the multiple copies of documents in an electronic environment,
> not only in back ups, but the ease of creating and sending them to everyone.


Here's where we could have provided a definite value.  In the past, where I
am now and another employer both required the purchase of filing equipment
or the addition of space for filing to be reviewed and approved by the RIM
function.  The (obvious) reason for this was to give us the opportunity to
offer options to them... better filing plans, use of central filing areas,
rethinking of distribution/workflow, reorganization of space or other
similar changes.   Once we went to more electronic methods, we (in many
cases) were removed from the equation, because the expenses weren't part of
space and equipment... they were "investments in technology".  How many
others remember the requirements to justify the budget for technology and
hardware, and how the common argument used was "less filing space; more
effective use of staffing"???  And because everyone wanted technology, they
bought it.

Back to the pretenders - the last few years have presented a major change
> for them. (Snipped) They knew they had to have RM in their suite of
> products, but had little idea what they had purchased.


And this is happening more and more, the vendors have it but don't know what
it is... they know they need it... but don't understand how it works. And as
I mentioned earlier, they ARE getting better, in fact they're hiring more
and more of "US", but they aren't embracing us for what we know and what
it's worth to them YET... they see it as another tool in their sales utility
belt, but they don't have Batman-like proficiency in using it yet =)  \

What's making what was starting to get better worse though, is the
proliferation of storage vendors pitching their version of "ILM" now, and
basing all the techniques on a bottom line concept.  Cheaper methods of
storing stuff you don't use as much... but still selling more and more
storage to the same people.

It has been a paradigm shift for them and they are beginning to get it. I
> can not tell you how it warmed my heart to see how many RM sessions are
> being held at user conferences of the big ECM providers. At lunch the reps
> and bus dev people stated they didn't know records management and needed to
> learn.


=)  But they were doing that because they knew the RIMs were attending the
lunch, they were in the room wanted to hear it admitted.  And they're
offering the session at their UG meetings because if they don't, they can't
get the IT and RIM folks in the room together... what they need is to create
a situation for cross-pollination where they have systems deployed and not
being accepted.

They and IT finally get it, but there is a learning curve. We can help teach
> them and, yes, the true pretenders will drop out of the game. Hopefully not
> taking too many customers with them.


IT still doesn't get it, because they don't see the value in getting it.
Ask them about lifecycle management, backups and archiving... ask them about
SEC 17a-4 and how they're managing the e-mail stores and then tell me they
"get it".

Yes, we can help teach them, but it's like teaching adults to wear seat
belts... they know why they should, and it's not the injuries or death that
makes them wear them, it's the tickets they get for not wearing them that
changes their attitudes.  That costs them money, and it's real... the other
stuff only happens to the other guys.  IT isn't being deposed, fined or
fired in these cases of failure to properly manage information, nor is their
staffing or funding levels decreasing, in fact it's just the opposite...
when you get rewarded for doing something wrong, it's tough to want to learn
to do it right.

Too deep for a Friday, I know... but it's my opinion and I'm stickin' with
it.

Larry
--
Larry Medina
Danville, CA
RIM Professional since 1972

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance