It has been interesting to watch the swirl of speculation of why Microsoft
has finally jumped in the RM swimming pool.
I may be able to offer another perspective.
Back in 2000 when I was the President of TrueArc, we saw the need for
records management for the then SharePoint V1 and integrated ForeMost with
SharePoint. We became the first vendor to get the combination DoD 5015.2
certified.
Starting back then and for many years I have lobbied long and loudly
directly to the product folks at Microsoft to take a more active role in
addressing RM with their products that create and manage content like
SharePoint and Content Management Server.
What you have to understand is that Microsoft's philosophy has been to be a
platform provider which relied on partners to round out their solutions with
the additional needed functionality. RM and workflow are two good examples
of this over the last 6 years since we at TrueArc integrated ForeMost with
SharePoint.
I think what has been happening over the last six years has been the normal
evolution of Microsoft's platform (STS -> SPS V1 -> SPS V2 -> SPS V3 coming)
and the growing adoption of these technologies by the marketplace. As the
SharePoint platform has gained significant popularity and adoption by many
customers, they went back to Microsoft and said "Hey, we need some organic
records management capability".
I think they are also responding the competitive pressures of the market.
Case in point is Oracle adding RM to Collaboration Suite 10g and the fact
that their other main competitor, IBM, provides RM organically.
Finally, I think the entire ECM market is maturing and is recognizing the
importance of RM as a core capability needed to manage the authenticity and
life cycle of content. We have been shouting about this for years and it
took Enron, MCI, and the response offered by the Sarbanes Oxley Act combined
to get the rest of the business and IT world to sit up and listen. I think
this is true with Microsoft. Their clients telling them that they needed
help with compliance was another tipping point.
I think the great thing about the Microsoft RM Blog is that the RM team at
Microsoft is not presenting marketing swill or pitching to all of us. They
are starting a conversation and it behooves everyone with a comment,
suggestion, question, or opinion to comment on their Blog. I know many of
the Microsoft folks personally and they want your feedback and they will
listen.
I hope that sheds a little different light on this.
Finally, I wanted to mention that I started a Blog:
http://BetterECM.wordpress.com and want to encourage folks to check it out.
I plan to discuss topics like this, review some of the new ECM technologies
coming to market including the Open Source offerings, and engage in
conversations with whoever wants to talk about the market.
Best Regards,
Russell Stalters
Compliance Solutions Group
"The Microsoft Compliance People"
Email: [log in to unmask]
Check out our Web Site...
www.compliancesolutionsgrp.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Graham Kitchen
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 12:44 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [RM] Microsoft RM blog
I believe they had a misunderstanding of what records management was so they
thought that it could be eliminated with the use of computer systems.
While I was marketing my consulting services, one prospective client told me
"we don't need records management, we have computers".
Hokayfine.
Graham Kitchen
Corporate Records Manager
Unified Western Grocers
5200 Sheila Street
Commerce, California 90040
Telephone: (323)264-5200 Extension 4560
Cell: (323)243-1865
email: [log in to unmask]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Records Management Program
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Grieme, Gary L.
> Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 12:32 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Microsoft RM blog
>
> >>>> Please read the confidentiality statement below <<<<
>
> <<<I use to wonder why Microsoft didn't get involved in electronic
> records management as far back as 1990.>>>
>
> Me too. My theory is the software gurus, including Microsoft, used to
> believe that records management could be totally automated.
> Now they're
> coming around to realizing there is a human component that can't be
> automated--but humans still need the right tools and there's a market
> for them. Maybe I'm wrong, I'm sure someone on the list could
> clarify.
>
> Gary L. Grieme
> Records Manager
> (612) 349-8538
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
> __________________________________________________
>
> Information contained in this e-mail transmission is privileged,
> confidential and covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
> 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521.
>
> If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, distribute, or
> reproduce this transmission.
>
> If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please notify
> us immediately of the error by return email and please delete the
> message from your system.
>
> Pursuant to requirements related to practice before the U. S. Internal
> Revenue Service, any tax advice contained in this communication
> (including any attachments) is not intended to be used, and cannot be
> used, for purposes of (i) avoiding penalties imposed under the U. S.
> Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to
> another person any tax-related matter.
>
> Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
>
> Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P.
> http://www.rkmc.com
> __________________________________________________
>
> List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
> Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
>
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
|
