ARMA San Antonio 02 8-2012

ARMA – San Antonio

Records Management 2.0

Presented by: Mike Alsup
Date: February 8, 2012
Information Management for Everyone 0

Agenda
• Challenges that RM Solutions Must Address  The Problem
• Best Practices:
– Electronic Records Mgmt.  Current State of the Art
– SharePoint Content & Records Mgmt.  New Tools and Features
• Foundation for a Best Practices Framework SharePoint Best Practices
• Implementing SharePoint for ECM & RM  We’re Excited!
• How to Succeed in RM 2.0 Deployments  You Should Be Too!


Alsup Frame of Reference
• 35 Years as ECM/RM Consultant/Integrator
– Accenture, Booz, Allen, BSG, Align Solutions / Luminant, Gimmal Group
– 1980 career goal: help clients move from paper-based processes to automated document mgmt.
processes
– Assumption: this was beyond the span of my career
– Last five years  focused on SharePoint as ENTERPRISE ECM & RM Platform

– www.gimmal.com for information on Gimmal
– Alsup blog – www.akqj10.com (ace, king, queen, jack, ten)
– Alsup blog – www.aiimcommunities.org ERM, SharePoint Communities

• AIIM Involvement
– Southwest Chapter  Programs VP (1991-97, 2000-09), President (1997-2000)
– International Board  Member (1999 – 2001, 2007 – 2010)
– AIIM Conference Committee  Member (1995-2000, 2004-2007), Chair – 2000
– Accreditation/Education Committee  Member (1997-2011)
– EmTAG  Member (1998 – 2011), Chair (2004 – 2006)
• AIIM SharePoint Course
– We built it. We are proud of it. We are certifying our entire team


Gimmal is an ECM & RM Solution Provider
For the World’s Leading Organizations
• Across all Industries & Government
• Thousands of successful engagements
Enterprise Content and Records Experts
• Consulting, Integration & Implementation
Industry Leading SharePoint Software
• Governance and Compliance
• Unified Records Management
• SAP & SharePoint Integration
Industry Awards and Recognition
• AIIM and ARMA
• SharePoint Product Advisory Board
• Inc. 500|5000 for 6 consecutive years

Top 10 Questions in RM
• Can we do everything with SharePoint?
– Does SharePoint RM scale to the Enterprise?
– Does SharePoint 2010 RM fix the records problems from MOSS 2007?

• Can we justify consolidating ECM & RM to a single vendor?
– What about our investments in “X”?

• Do we need one File Plan and Retention Schedule for Electronic and
Physical Records?
– What about our Paper-based Records Management?
– How should we use “Big Buckets” in our File Plan?

• Who should control our Records Management functions?
• How is SharePoint related to eDiscovery?
• Where do we start?
• If we build it, will they all come?
• How do I get Executives to Care?

SharePoint is a Visionary Leader
➔ SharePoint is Consolidating the
ECM and RM Markets
– 125MM SharePoint Licensed Users* SharePoint
– 65,000 Companies*
– 67% are rolling out SharePoint to
Enterprise*
– 700,000 SharePoint Developers*
– 50% of Gartner inquiries
➔ SharePoint is Energizing the ECM
and RM Markets
– Microsoft owns productivity market,
ECM and RM a natural extensions
– Many Best of Breed applications
➔ SharePoint is compelling platform
for compliance & enterprise RM


Ungoverned “Organic” Environment
Top Site Portal

Issues:
Chaos grows with new sites
No central site directory
Each site has own look and feel
Navigation is inconsistent
No standard security model
Different definitions of content
Site 1 has “Invoice – Purchasing”
Site 2 has “Invoice”
Content volume increasing rapidly
Many convenience copies
Metadata mgmt. is inconsistent
All content is retained forever
How are Records managed?


Ungoverned “Organic” Environment
Top Site Portal Some sites may be connected to
Portal, others not

How are you
How do you going to
govern this? support this?


The Promise of Enterprise Content Management*
• Higher revenue and productivity
• Stronger compliance and control
• Improved customer experience
• Increased customer loyalty
• Higher quality content
• Streamlined processes

* Gartner, The Copernican Revolution in Content, 8 June 2011


The Reality of ECM


Some More ECM History
• ECM began with Evolution: Mainframes Networks
• Users given more autonomy in creating and managing information
– Authoring tools like Microsoft Office & Word Perfect
– Scanning and imaging, transforming paper to digital,
• Earliest ECM was shared drives on the networks
– Still the most prevalent document storage method
• Electronic Document Management (EDM) driven by processes:
– Engineering drawing management (CAD)
– Contract management (version control)
– Invoice processing (business process automation)


Records Technology History
• RM Solutions were born from a paper-based process
– Driven by the need to manage large volumes of paper
– Space management and inventory tracking with barcodes were common
– Began in the DOS days or on Mainframes for large companies
– Solutions were typically used by a small user community

• Electronic RM Solutions began to emerge in the early 1990’s
– Driven by the need for rigorous control of electronic records
– DoD5015.2 (1993) and VERS (1997) were early and familiar standards
– Most all electronic recordkeeping systems built to these standards
– The industry was give a big “shot in the arm” with the scandals of the early
2000, (Enron and WorldCom)


History- Convergence of ECM & RM
• Compliance drove convergence in the EDM/RM market
– Hummingbird – Educom
– Open Text – PS Software & Hummingbird
– Documentum – TrueArc
– IBM – Tarian & FileNet
– Oracle – Stellent
– Autonomy – MDY, HP Trim, Zantaz, Meridio
• DoD5015.2 = primary design criteria for all these solutions
• Very thin, paper-based features


EDiscovery further drives ECRM market
• Enron & WorldCom in the early 2000 didn’t just spark the
compliance flame, it ignited a new market  eDiscovery
• Further fanning the flames of eDiscovery was the new Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) in 2006


The result of this ECRM evolution
• Monolithic solutions
• Heavily weighted towards
control
• Very little effort to engage
the end users


Traditional ECM systems have missed the mark in delivering
true records management
• Non-intuitive end user experience
• Too many systems
• Expensive to integrate and maintain
• Low user adoption
• Not usable
• Low findability
• Low % of managed content
• Too much content
• High eDiscovery costs


Collaboration Solutions
• The first widely adopted solution was Lotus Notes
• These solution were designed to encourage knowledge sharing
• Simple, ease to use, fast to deploy
• Collaboration converges naturally with Content Management
• SharePoint is now the run away leader in the Collaboration Market


SharePoint, a History
• First announced in 2001 - SharePoint Portal Server 2001 (SPS 2001)
• Microsoft released a free add-on to Office 2000 called SharePoint
Team Services (STS) focused on team collaboration
• STS was renamed Windows SharePoint Services (WSS), and
became part of Windows Server 2003
• SPS v2 was built on top of WSS and named Microsoft Office
SharePoint Portal Server 2003 (SPS 2003)
• Microsoft Office SharePoint Server (MOSS) 2007 was released,
adding first ever RM features
• Tremendous strides forward in ECM features as well
• Fastest selling server product in Microsoft History


The result of this SharePoint evolution

• Flexible Solution
• Heavily weighted towards ease
of use and autonomy
• Uptake of SharePoint is
sometimes described as “Viral”


It’s about finding a balance


Balance

• Balance the needs of the
organizations with the
wants of the users
• Recognize that end users
will NOT become records
managers
• Without all content being
managed we will never be
compliant


• Leverage the Viral Adoption of SharePoint to connect with the
Knowledge Worker
• Transparent Participation in a Compliant Information Mgmt.
• All content is managed, from a lifecycle, compliance and legal
hold perspective
• Ease the burden of Discovery with enhanced “Findability”
• Eliminate reliance upon end users choosing and following policy
and compliance rules
• Lines of Business collaborate with IT in defining the rules and
ongoing review process


What an RM 2.0 Solution is Not
• SharePoint RM, either In-Place or via the Records Center
– Gimmal’s largest SharePoint implementation is based on Open Text
– Other very successful implementations include EMC|Documentum
– SharePoint RM is attractive to many but not the only alternative
• EDiscovery
– Still need tools like Recommind & Autonomy


2011 Findings
RM 2.0  Informationis Lifecycle
• This a very attractive message to IT
• Companies agree that RM 1.0 failed and
Hold that SharePoint is platform they want
• Many want to consolidate for
Work In economics instead of RM 1.0 failure
Temporary • This Final
Progress is an enterprise application, not a
department application
• Organizations understand potential of
Disposition SharePoint in different ways
 some organizations not ready for
• All Information is managed from creation to disposition
enterprise RM
• Retention for all information in every state of the ILC
• Early classification (indexing) is an important step to compliance
• Rules are enforced by the technology

Result: Predictability, Relevance, Accuracy, Confidence and Trust


Best Practices for Electronic
Records Mgmt. in SharePoint


State of Electronic Records Management - 2012

• Most content does not have true “record” value
• Once stored, most content is not retrieved after a few days
• Large volumes of unmanaged content
 critical to get rid of draft and WIP for storage and legal reasons
• Still have “fire drills” when records are needed for FOIA, litigation,
investigations, etc.
• ECM solutions can be complicated and expensive and frustrating

Information Management for Everyone 27 27

OVERALL RM BEST PRACTICES
• Governance Covers All Content
• Retention Hold Process is Defined and Enforced
• Communication and Training is in Place
• Compliance Monitoring is in Place
• Automated Destruction Process & Destruction Logs
• Enterprise Information Lifecycle Model
• Records Retention Schedule
SharePoint 2010


WHAT’S WORKING – BEST PRACTICES
The Purpose of a Retention Schedule is record retention
– Applicable to all record media, formats
– Compliant w/ legal requirements in all jurisdictions
– Compatible with how laws and regulations are organized
– The Simpler the Better!
– Integrated Legal Research
– Big Buckets
SharePoint 2010


Legal Research and Legal Citations
• Failure to comply with laws and regulations creates risks:
fines, sanctions, and penalties, including embarrassment
15,000 legal citations at US federal and state Sites
• Legal research usually performed by attorneys
Legal Citations
• Mapping Legal Citations to Retention Categories
Retention Schedule
• SharePoint 2010
Relates Citations to SharePoint Sites via Retention Categories
and Content Types


Big Bucket Approach
• Retention Categories are “buckets” – where retention &
disposition managed
– Same or similar business processes
– Same or similar legal and regulatory requirements
– Maintained for the same or similar amount of time
• Fewer/bigger “buckets” are better
– Easier for users & automatic categorization tools
– Improve ability to consistently retain records
– Lower total cost of ownership
• Best practice to structure retention schedules based on ISO 15489
– 1st Site is derived from functions and activities, not business unit names
 (Business Function)
– 2nd Site is based on the activities constituting the function; retention periods
are assigned & destruction is managed at this Site
 (Retention Category)
– 3rd Site is comprised of record types generated as a result of activities or
Information Management for Everyone record series  (Record Type = Content Type)
transactions within each 31

• File Plan
• Retention Schedule
• Legal Citations
• Legal Holds
Record
Repository

Top Level Portal

Team Sites

MySites

Record Retention Schedule
Retention Retention Retention Category Description Record Retention Retention
Category Category (Content) Event Period
Code Type

HUM70 Personnel Files – Individual employee records related Retention period 6 years
Personnel to hiring, promotion, performance begins with the
Actions appraisals, transfers and disciplinary content is market
action. Also includes employee final/ declared a
relocation. record.
HUM70 Employee Warnings

HUM70 Performance Reports

HUM73 Personnel Files – Individual employee records with Retention period 60 years
Termination, terms of employment, salary and begins with the
Training and wage schedules, technical training, content is market
Summary safety training, resumes, applications, final/ declared a
Records and termination records. record.
HUM73 Employee Training
Attendance Records
HUM73 Letters of Resignation
HUM73 Termination Documents

HUM73 Exit Interviews
HUM73 Employment Application


Content Types & Record Routing Rules

Retention Enterprise Content Type
Business Category
Function Organizational
(Big Buckets) Local Content
Content Type:
Type
Finance
Fin.01 General Ledger
25 Years
Managing
Accounting Fin.01.01
Activities Ledger Voucher
25 years 15 Years
Finance,
Accounting & Tax
(FIN) Expense Report
Fin.01.02 15 Years
Ledger
Fin.02 15 years
Bank Deposit
Managing 10 Years
Banking
Activities
Fin.02.01
Ledger Wire Transfer
10 Years
10 years


Information Lifecycle

• Content Types
• File Plan • Information Policy
• Retention Schedule • Site Templates
Term
• Legal Citations • Document Templates
Record • Legal Holds
Store /
Repository Content Hub

Top Level Portal

Team Sites

MySites
SharePoint Framework

INFORMATION LIFECYCLE

Retention
XX Days
Retention
XX Months
Retention
Retention Schedule
• Retention
Location(s) Location(s) Location(s) • Location
Network Shares Document Libraries Record Center or
E-mail Inbox 3rd Party Product • Metadata
Metadata
Name
Metadata
Name
Metadata
Name
• Security
Content Type Content Type
• Versions
• Disposition
• Many others

Findings
Taxonomy Master Model of SharePoint Information
• Heart in SharePoint
Lifecycle Management
• Companies like it but find it hard to

(internal, external, confidential)
understand what it means to implement

Retention Category Code
Owning Organization
Content Type Name

(system generated)
Content Type Level

Last Modified Date

Employee Number

Event Trigger Date
Employee Name
Security Class

Content Type
Create Date
ILC State

ILC Date
Enterprise Enterprise X X X X X X
Content Type
Organizational Human Resources – X X X
Content Type Employee Specific
Local Content Personnel Files – HUM70 X
Type Personnel Actions
Local Content Personnel Files – HUM73 X
Type Hiring, Termination,
Training and
Summary Records


• Content Types
• Retention Schedule • Site Templates
Term
• Legal Citations • Document Templates
Record • Legal Holds
Store /
Repository Content Hub

Top Level Portal

Site
Provisioning
• Lifecycle
• Taxonomy
Team Sites • SP Features
• XML Config.
• Navigation
• Search
• Security

MySites
SharePoint Framework

2011 Findings
SITE PROVISIONING is required to enable enterprise
• This
content governance in SharePoint
• •Produces standardized environments
Companies like message but find it hard
–to understand what membership them
Security groups and it means to
Roles
• –Most companies don’t do this initially
– Pages and navigation Administrative
– Web Parts Governance Focus
– Lists Content Governance
• Support all Site Templates – Document Libraries Focus
• Publishing – Content Types
• Collaboration – Site and library columns and auto-
• Organization population rules
– Custom functions
• Project
• Community of Practice • Leverages request and approval
workflow  Content Types & Features
• Personal (MySites)
• Limits Local Admin’s to local needs
– Minimizes “Administration” training
– Ensures governance settings

39

Advantages
• Pure SharePoint User Experience
External • Multiple Repositories supported /
File Plan
Repository Retention
 Open Text, HP, EMC, Laserfiche
Schedule
• EBS, RBS products remove Types
• ContentContent from
• Information Policy
SQL Server • Site Templates
Term
Disadvantages / • Document Templates
Store
Content Hub
• Multiple Repositories
Top• Additional Coordination Required
Level Portal
• Who owns File Plan?
Site
• Govern SharePoint Content Types
Provisioning
from an external source?
• How to incorporate into• new
Lifecycle
• Taxonomy
Optional: SharePoint sites?
StoragePoint • XML Config.
Documentum • Additional Integration Required• Navigation
Laserfiche
Open Text • 25% of significant cost • Search
• Security
HP Trim

MySites
SharePoint Framework 40

MULTI-REPOSITORY MODEL FOR DOCUMENTUM AND SHAREPOINT

EMC Applications built on EMC Solution

EMC-1 EMC-2 EMC-3 EMC-4



EMC Platform
Regulated
Lifecycle Business Process
Content Imaging
Management Management
Management
PROCESS SERVICES
Information
Desktop Record Digital Asset Federated XML
Auto Classification Transformations Search Rights
Integration Management Management Services
Management
ADVANCED CONTENT SERVICES

Storage Optimization Trusted Content Services Integrated Archiving Backup and Recovery

REPOSITORY SERVICES


Information Lifecycle Advantages
• SharePoint-pure
SharePoint
• Leverages SharePoint ecosystem / File Plan
2010 • Enterprise Scalable
Retention
Schedule
• Content Types
• Includes an Information Lifecycle

MSFT
• Retention Schedule • Includes Site Provisioning
Term • Site Templates
• Legal Citations
Store / • Document Templates
Records • Legal Holds • Includes File Plan and Retention
Content Hub
Center Schedule Governance in sites
Top•Level Portal
Metadata Inheritance for ease of use
• Supports Enterprise Routing Rules
Site
• FAST all Components Required
Recommind / Exterro / Stored IQ / Clearwell / Kazeon / Not / Encase / Work Products / Autonomy etc.
Provisioning
Disadvantages • Lifecycle
• Some Assembly Required • Taxonomy
• Planning is Essential • XML Config.
• Navigation
• Harder to retrofit sites thanSearch with
• start
new sites • Security

MySites
SharePoint Framework 42

Bruce Miller – www.rimtech.ca
• Bruce Miller founded two RM companies
– TrueArc  became EMC|Documentum RM
– Tarian  became IBM RM
• Primary Author of DoD 5015.2 Standard
• Two Reports – Registration Required
– In Place Records Management in SharePoint 2010
– GimmalSoft SharePoint 2010 First Look Product Review
– www.rimtech.ca


Bruce Miller – www.rimtech.ca
• DoD 5015.2 – 168 Requirements for Certification
• SharePoint OOB – meets 72 of DoD Requirements
• Fortune 1000 – Needs 105 of the DoD Requirements
– File Plan Management
– Formal, Multistage Records Disposition
– Case File Handling of Records
– Event Driven Disposition
– Records Transfer
– Email Integration
– Vital Records


RECORD DECLARATION & DISPOSITION OPTIONS
SharePoint OOB
• Send to Record Center Users are Records Managers
• In Place Records Mgmt. Site Administrators are Records Managers
• SharePoint Event Records Managers are SharePoint Admin’s
– Record Date Reached
Additional Lifecycle RM Options
• Declare “Final”
– Change Lifecycle State to “Final”
– Press the Final Button
– “Select all Final” from List
– System Event
• System Event
– Contract Termination Date in SAP  applied to all related contract documents
• Crawler Event
– Documents with PII locked down


SHARE DRIVE AND SHAREPOINT SITE MIGRATION
Reality
• Compelling Market and Messages
Process: • Many vendors, no complete solution.
• Crawl Share Drives & legacy SharePoint sites  derive classification information
• Active Navigation
• Tag content with best fit Content Types
• Stored IQ
• Suggest a navigating taxonomy for SharePoint sites  Lists and Libraries in SharePoint
• EMC Kazeon
• Users review & accept taxonomy  Best Practices to accelerate process
• Digital Reef
• Migrate content to the SharePoint sites
• Concept Searching
• Have a Plan for File Shares Post-Migration
• Recommind
Goal  do this automatically except review
Benefit  Compliant SharePoint sites
Work  Define mapping to Content Types

SharePoint
SharePoint
Sites
Sites

Share
Drives

Crawling and Classification

Reality
SHAREPOINT 2010 SITE This is the problem thatMODEL
MIGRATION many
•
organizations will present
Team Sites
• Many variations based on:
• State of legacy SharePoint sites
Transfer Ownership • Complexity of SharePoint
customizations
• Budget to proceed
Controlled Site Collections
Record Snapshot
• Discussion crystallizes organization
Controlled Controlled Controlled
Information
perspective
Information Information
Site Site
Information
Site
Lifecycle


Reality
3 Tier Email Model• Compelling Market and Messages
• 3 Zone Model is Popular
80% 15% • Email volumes are daunting
5%

• Many competitors, no complete
solution
Some email must be • Colligo email or
Some
retained on a temporary
basis as work in progress.
• MicrosoftisExchange
unstructured
information retained
Majority of email created,
• Symantec Enterprise Vault
as a company record.
received or sent.
• Autonomy
Work in Progress
Assisted Delete
Tier 1 Tier 2 • IBMOfficial Records
Tier 3

Time Limited Space/Time Constrained
• EMC|SourceOne
Retention per
Assisted Disposal Short Term Storage • Open Text
Retention Schedule

• Tiers 1 & 2 in Exchange, Tier 3 in SharePoint 2010
• ProofPoint (NextPage)
• Tier 1  Time limited • Microsoft Exchange and SharePoint
• Tier 2  Time and Space limited Teams are not in synch on Email RM
• Tier 3 model
• Retention Schedule Managed in SharePoint
• Colligo Client for Records Declaration
• Some additional integration may be justified in Tier 2  same user experience

Break


SHAREPOINT CONTENT GOVERNANCE MODEL
Business Functions Projects/Communities

Web Part II Web Part III Web Part IV Web Part VI
• Identify Required Components
Web Part I Web Part I Web Part I Web Part I Web Part V • Site Templates
• Lists and Libraries
• Content Types
Site III Web Part IV Site IV Site III Site IV
• Processes
Governance • Web Parts
Roadmap Site II Site II Site II Sub site II Site II Site VI • Custom Functions
• Define Direction and Phasing
Site I Site I Site I Sub site I Site I Site I

G&G OP’s HR
Gulf of Drilling • Team Site Templates Implemented
Site Finance. Mexico Community • Local Processes & Content Types
Site Site
Collection AP Site Site Site
Collection Collection
Collection Collection • Department or Team Administration

• Content Types & Routing Rules
• Managed Metadata / Term Store
SharePoint Content Governance Infrastructure • Information Lifecycle Governance
• Administration & Provisioning
• Technical Architecture
SharePoint Technical Infrastructure • Base SharePoint Configuration
• SQL Server / .NET / RBS
• Hardware / Storage/ Networks

Marathon Oil Case Study
Integrated international energy company. 5th largest refiner in U.S. Retail
marketing system comprises approximately 5,700 locations in 17 states.
18,000 knowledge workers globally.
ECM/RM Program:
– Relevant, up-to-date & trusted information
– Consistent records management
– Knowledge sharing platform
Gimmal Services:
– ECM Program feasibility in MOSS 2007 timeframe (2005-2006)
– ECM vendor evaluation to support vendor selection
– Enterprise Launch to 15,000 knowledge workers
– Enterprise File Plan & Retention Schedule Update (2011)
– Change Management Video
– Case study on Microsoft.com  search for “Marathon Oil”


Marathon - “Maraview”
• SharePoint used to manage all unstructured content
• Users Work In SharePoint Only
• Integrated with an Open Text Records Repository
• Filtering & Views are native SharePoint
• Content In Either Repository based on Business
Rules (Information Lifecycle States)
• Movement Can Be User Or Process Driven
• Location of content transparent to users
• Uses SharePoint Desktop Integration With Office
• Automated Site Provisioning & Standard TeamSites
• File Plan In Open Text Records Repository Controlled
By SharePoint Content Types


Marathon: Deployment Model

•File Plan • Content Types
Enterprise • Information Policy
•Retention Schedule
Intranet • Retention Definition
•Legal Citations Master
Site Records • Document Templates
•Legal Holds
Collections Repository Site
Open Text

Organization, Automated
Project, Site
Workgroup & Provisioning
Community
TeamSites

MySites


Hold

Work In
Temporary Final
Progress

Retention Retention Retention
90 Days 12 Months Retention Schedule
Disposition
Location(s) Location(s) Location(s)
Network Shares SharePoint Open Text

Metadata Metadata Metadata
Name Name Name
Content Type Content Type


Marathon Lessons Learned
• SharePoint ECM is a fine foundation for ECM & RM
– 15K SharePoint Sites with one Information Lifecycle and Retention Schedule
> 12K MySites
– Very well received by users and supported by CEO
• Divided into 2 Companies in 2011
• Completed SharePoint 2010 Team Site migration work in 2011
• Open Text works better for some things than others
– Physical RM  yes
– Search  no. Items found in multiple locations
– Synchronization  no. Large % of cost is repository synchronization
– Users prefer Office/Outlook  Native environment, not ECM or Web Parts
• Content governance needed in SharePoint regardless of ECM Suite


Share Drive Replacement
Basic Content Mgmt.
Windows Explorer Replacement

G&G OP’s HR
Gulf of Drilling • Team Site Templates Implemented
Site Site Site Finance. Mexico Community • Local Processes & Content Types
AP Site Site Site
Collection Collection Collection
Collection Collection • Department or Team Administration


Fortune 20 Company
Requirements
• Information Management – or ‘IM’ – is the processes, procedures, technology
tools, and behaviors by which ORG controls and leverages information to achieve
our mission and ensure compliance with legal and regulatory obligations.
• ORG information – physical and electronic – is an organizational asset
• ORG has a legal obligation to retain and preserve documents
– Compliance is not optional
• IM Program is responsible for fulfilling the IM Policy mandate, including the
preservation hold, and providing operational support to ensure consistent
information management practices across all ORG functions and locations.
– IM Processes and Procedures are derived from the IM Policy.
– IM Technology Tools establish a secure information mgmt. environment.
– IM Behaviors must be adopted by everyone – “I am IM”.
• Working together we can manage our information effectively to help achieve our
operational mission and ensure compliance with legal and regulatory obligations.
• One team – one mission – “We are IM”


Fortune 20 Company
Implementation
• Connect
– ORG tool for managing information
– Provides a single storage location for managed and controlled documents
– Next generation SharePoint solution similar to Windows Explorer
– Organizes and secures electronic information making it available to the right people at
the right time with preservation hold compliance built in consistent with the IM Policy
• Result
– A phased rollout of Connect occurred in 2011
– Every function/location participated in the implementation process
– Communication activities provided relevant information when needed
– Training to ensure users understand Connect to create, store, and manage information
– IM Program team facilitates adoption process providing expert assistance
– All employees, contractors, third party service providers and employees required to
comply with the IM Policy and utilize Connect


SharePoint Records Management
Proof of Concept

SharePoint
Records Metadata &
Center Rule
Inheritance
or Content
Organizer
3rd Party • SharePoint Records Center
Repository Drop
of Record Zones
• File Plan Builder Implemented
• Content Organizer Implemented
• Team Site Templates Implemented
File Plan OP’s HR
Builder Site Site
Finance. • Local Processes & Content Types
Collection Collection
AP Site • Department or Team Administration


Unified Records Management – A Case Study
Our Mission: Information Management for Everyone

Microsoft Legal &
Corporate Affairs

Information
The World Lifecycle and
Leader in Governance
Information Solutions for
Management SharePoint
Services


The problem we are solving
• Information is siloed across multiple applications making
information hard to find for users
• Because of siloed applications, retention policies are managed
and applied in multiple systems or not at all, creating risk to the
company
• The rise in litigations means attorneys and paralegals spend an
enormous of amount time search multiple systems for early case
assessments. This results in rising soft costs and hard costs when
working with outside counsel
• Many of the applications being supported are old and expensive
to maintain. Microsoft wanted to leverage Office 365 and
SharePoint as much as possible.


RM Personas Amy is a Business
User.

 Amy would like to declare a record.

Three primary users
 She wants to search and retrieve records
at the file rather than the box level.
 She wants to view the check in/check out
Tim is a Records status of her records.
Manager.
 Amy needs a reminder when records are
checked out to her for longer than a
 Tim wants a robust search function across the certain period of time.
multiple document repositories.
 He needs a consistent taxonomy so a single
entry locates records related to a specific
topic.
 Tim would like more visibility into record Marisa is a Super
history and interactions, including all User.
electronic and physical record movements.
 He would like to see the chain of custody.  Marisa would like to un-declare a record
 Tim needs to be able to apply retention for a team member.
requirements, up to and including final  She would like to view the check in/check
disposal. out status of her team’s records.
 He would like to restrict record ownership  Marisa can search and retrieve records
based on specific user permissions, including with minimal third party intervention.
restricting certain users to read-only.  Marisa gets a reminder when records
 Tim needs reports on checked out records, checked out by her department are due
including a status on customer alerts. for return.
 She also needs an alert when customers
65
Information Management for Everyone 65 have returned records.

What Keeps Them Up at Night?
• General Counsel
• Worries if they are in compliance with legal and regulatory
rules related to their retention policy
• Worries if they have found all the content and email needed to
meet their eDiscovery obligations
• CIO’s
• Struggling to consolidate platforms in an effort to lower cost
and improve corporate performance
• CFO
• Is worried about the high cost of supporting multiple
environments and the rising cost of outside counsel wading
through mountains of content in early case assessment

Solution Framework

Retention Policies

Long Term
Create Collaborate Review/Approve Store Disposal
Retention

SharePoint & SharePoint SharePoint Record SharePoint &
Office Products SharePoint
Office 365 “in place” Center Iron Mountain

Outlook/Colligo Lync 2010 Iron Mountain Physical Records
Management System

68

Records Architecture
LCA Enterprise (300K Sites)
LCAWeb
Collections “In Place”
Compliance Driven
OneLCA SharePoint Sites Microsoft Enterprise Portals
SharePoint SharePoint
Collections Online Farms //SharePoint //portal

Managed Sites Unmanaged Sites
Link and Move to Record Center Send to Record Center

SharePoint Record Center
Term Store (Taxonomy) FAST Search Role Based Security Managed Metadata Information Management Policies

Unified Records Management Content Sync & Migration E-mail Management,
(URM) File Shares & Offline

Unified Records Management (URM)

• The role of GimmalSoft  The role of Iron Mountain-Accutrac
 Purpose Built Physical Records
– Built Inside SharePoint
Management
– SharePoint Information Lifecycle &  Physical Process Workflow
Governance Solutions  Record Classification
> Automated Site Provisioning  Index and Label Files
> Enterprise Information Lifecycle  Barcode Tracking
> Transparent Record Declaration  Request and Retrieval
Processes  View of all Physical Inventory
– DoD5015.2 Certified Records  Access Offsite Inventory
Management  Apply Retention and Holds
> The management and disposition of  Management and Reporting
both electronic & physical record  Space Management
> Central creation of file plan and deploys
to all site collections globally
> Manage email as a record through
simple drag and drop
> Case or matter based retention and
disposition policies


URM in SharePoint
• End users have unified view of physical and
electronic records within a SharePoint
• Users can:
– Search for physical and electronic records in
SharePoint
– Manage physical item containership
– Retrieve and create physical records
– Request pickup, delivery, and check out
• Records Coordinators can:
– Apply retention policy to physical and electronic
records
– Apply legal holds to physical and electronic records
• SharePoint & Accutrac become systems of
record across physical and electronic content


Actionable menu for physical records

Physical records ribbon exposes
services end users can provision
directly from their desktop.
Request will be passed directly
through to IM Connect


Unified view of Physical & Electronic

Physical & Electronic
content is managed with a
consistent set of policies and
a common disposition
process

Allows users to associate
physical records with their
containers through a parent
child relationship


The problem we are solving
• Information is siloed across multiple application making
information hard to find for users
• Because of siloed applications, retention policies are
managed and applied in multiple systems or not at all,
creating risk to the company
• The rise in litigations means attorneys and paralegals spend
an amount of enormous time search multiple systems for
early case assessments. This results in rising soft costs and
hard costs when working with outside counsel
• Many of the applications being supported are old and
expensive to maintain. Microsoft wanted to leverage Office
365 and SharePoint as much as possible.


SharePoint Records Management
SAP Applications

AP Processing (P2P)
SharePoint SAP HR Processing (R2R)
Records Metadata & Searching for Documents Accounts Receivable (O2C)
Center Rule
Inheritance
Business Processes
or Content
Content Governance for SAP Scanning
Organizer Any to Any Doc to SAP OCR / ICR
3rd Party
Repository Drop
of Record Zones
ArchiveLink Connectors
File Plan Contracts HR Site Finance. SAP Communication Service
Builder Site Collection AP Site
Collection

 Use Capture Framework for
o Oracle Financials
SharePoint Content Governance Infrastructure o Microsoft Dynamics

SharePoint Technical Infrastructure

Fortune 100 Food Company
Problem: TCO of legacy FileNet system too expensive;
 wanted to move to SharePoint
• 65,000 SharePoint Users, wanted Team Sites with both SAP and SharePoint access to
documents for HR, Finance, Logistics, Plant Maintenance, IT, and PLM functions
• Future: automated invoice processing; desire for more open ECM and portal environment
– Yearly Invoices and Receipts Processed: 20M invoices, 13M delivery receipts
Solution: Replace FileNet with MOSS for SAP ECM
• MOSS, KnowledgeLake and Nintex as complementary enabling technologies
• ReadSoft for automating invoice processing
• Records Archival: SAP Outbound & Inbound Documents
• “Cloud hosted” Record Archive for Inactive Doc/Records
– SharePoint2007/SQL Server 2008 sits in the cloud at Microsoft BPOS
• Upgrading to SharePoint 2010
• Evaluating Content Type Model for Records Management


Microsoft View of SharePoint Products
Foundational ECM
 Limited Support for Products
Web Rich Document Human
Document Records Email
Content Media Output Centric
Mgmt. Mgmt. Archiving
Mgmt. Mgmt. Mgmt. Workflow

Supplemental ECM
 Embrace and extend SharePoint with Product Partners

Physical, DoD Business Transactional Archiving &
Scanning and
Records Process Content Library
Capture
Mgmt. Mgmt. Mgmt. Services


2011 Findings
SHAREPOINT ECOSYSTEM OF ECM PRODUCTS
• The best-of-breed nature of SharePoint
solutions makes companies nervous
Physical, DoD Business • Companies hungry for consistent &
Transactional
Scanning and
Archiving
Records Process Content Library
Mgmt. Mgmt. Mgmt.
content governance for applications
Capture
Services
File Trail, Nintex, K2,
• SharePoint ecosystem providers hungry
Hyland, SAP Kodak, ECopy Metalogix,
OmniRIM (AS), Global360, Kofax, Oracle consistent content governance for
for MetaVis,
LaserFiche, GimmalSoft, Metastorm applications AvePoint,
HP Trim, Autonomy RM, Readsoft Quest,
Iron Mtn. (Accutrac) • SharePoint is still building momentum
HP Trim
Kofax
KnowledgeLake
EMC

IBM
Open Text
Tools: AvePoint, Idera, Quest, Axceler, Neverfail
Email: Symantec, CommVault, Autonomy (Mimosa), EMC|SourceOne, Proofpoint, Colligo
Connectors: ESRI, Intergraph, SAP, Stone Bond, ERP-Link
Share Drive Migration: StoredIQ, Kazeon, Active Navigation, Digital Reef, Concept Searching
Search: FAST, Autonomy, Coveo, Google, MetaCarta, Recommind, EDiscovery Vendors
Services: KnowledgeLake, Hitachi, Catapult, Gimmal, Neudesic, EMC, Open Text, Dell + many

Best Practices for RM 2.0 Content Governance
• Define Content Governance Roadmap
– Define your Content Governance partner / product ecosystem
– Define your Content Type and Site Provisioning Templates and Inheritance
– Provide a Foundation for Consistent Team Sites and MySites
• Define an Enterprise Information Lifecycle
– Separate from business process
– Enforced across multiple repositories 10 – 12
– Achievable with a practical minimum of user involvement Weeks
• Enable Content Governance and Policy with a Framework
– Not just Infrastructure Governance  Content Governance
– With Support and Refresh of a Records Management Program(s)
– With Support and Refresh of a Legal and eDiscovery Program(s)
– With Support and Refresh of Knowledge Management Program(s)
• Demonstrate it with a Proof of Concept
• Prioritize the Projects for Enterprise Deployment
• The best time is with a new version of SharePoint (2010 vs. Wave 15?)

Summary
• Current RM solutions are not working and we need a better way
• Learn from highly adopted solutions like SharePoint on how to
engage end users
• SharePoint has the user adoption to enable Enterprise Records
Management to happen
• Need a crawl-walk-run strategy to achieve Enterprise Records
Management


Top 10 Questions in RM
• Can we do everything with SharePoint?
– Does SharePoint RM scale to the Enterprise?
– Does SharePoint 2010 RM fix the records problems from MOSS 2007?

• Can we justify consolidating ECM & RM to a single vendor?
– What about our investments in “X”?

• Do we need one File Plan and Retention Schedule for Electronic and
Physical Records?
– What about our Paper-based Records Management?
– How should we use “Big Buckets” in our File Plan?

• Who should control our Records Management functions?
• How is SharePoint related to eDiscovery?
• Where do we start?
• If we build it, will they all come?
• How do I get Executives to Care?

THANK YOU!
SharePoint Capture, Workflow and Records
Management

Presented by: Mike Alsup
Date: February 8, 2012

ARMA San Antonio 02 8-2012

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (16)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (18)

Similar to ARMA San Antonio 02 8-2012

Similar to ARMA San Antonio 02 8-2012 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

ARMA San Antonio 02 8-2012