M12S02 - ERM Software: Historic Timeline, Lessons Learned, Current Issues, Future Focus

284 views

Published on

From the MER Conference 2012

Speaker: Bruce Miller

The first Electronic Recordkeeping software emerged in 1991.

The US DoD 5015.2 standard has been in place since 1997, and is now undergoing its third major revision.

Some 60+ product certifications against the standard have been granted to date.

Today approximately 20 different products remain certified. These products continue to be sold around the world.

Yet successful deployment is nowhere near expectations.

Hear Bruce's unique perspective as he reviews the successes and frustrations of the very technology he invented and has evangelized for two decades.

In this session, learn:

- Why we have failed to realize the promise of ERM software,
- What went wrong,
- What have we achieved,
- Where have we failed to meet expectations,
- Why do we still seem unable to make it work, and
- Where we are now.

Bruce will make the case that in order to achieve the adoption rates we expect, change will have to come from all four stakeholder groups:

- RIM practitioners,
- Software vendors,
- IT managers, and
- Business leadership.

Hear Bruce's compelling vision for a way-forward roadmap for a more successful electronic recordkeeping future.

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
284
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

M12S02 - ERM Software: Historic Timeline, Lessons Learned, Current Issues, Future Focus

  1. 1. Cohasset Associates, Inc. NOTES ERM Software Historic Timeline, Lessons Learned, Current Issues, Future Focus The End Goal of EDRMS In Order for Disposition to Work 1. We organize our company into business activities. 2. We assign official retention policies Corporate Repository p p y to business activities. Business Activities 3. We must somehow match Admin Operations documents to business activities correctly. HR Accounting Mfg Delete Delete Delete after after after 8 years 5 years 15 years 1991 – The Beginning  ForeMost and PS Software from Canada  The Very first ERM Software  Focus on electronic  ERM Repository  Principle of Declaration  Electronic Classification  TRIM from Australia  Paper-Based  Later to adopt electronic capability2012 Managing Electronic Records Conference 2.1
  2. 2. Cohasset Associates, Inc. NOTES 1997 – US DoD 5015.2 Emerges  US Gulf War Syndrome  Legal and reputation loss for DoD  Strong impetus for electronic recordkeeping  A New Standard  ECM Vendors HAD to comply py  DOD obligation, industry-wide de Facto  Certification Testing Program  Wide Adoption  ECM Players had to play ball 5015.2 Certifications  There are only 15 unique vendors  (6) are Monster ECM Vendors  ECM  HP  TRIM, Autonomy (Being Purchased by HP)  IBM  Content Manager  FileNET  OpenText  Oracle  Microsoft (With GimmalSoft Compliance Suite Plug-in)  (4) are plug-in one-time “Special Projects”  Northrup Grumman (Documentum)  SAP (NetWeaver)  IIUI (Lotus)  Iron Mountain (Accutrac)  (5) Remainder are boutique (small) ECM/RM products  Feith  Wareitis  Infolinx  Alfresco  SystemWare 2002 – the Breakout  Major Players make their move  IBM (Tarian)  OpenText (PS Software)  Documentum (ForeMost/TrueArc)  TRIM goes it alone  Adapts to become a RM-oriented ECM Vendor  FileNet goes it alone  Nobody left to acquire2012 Managing Electronic Records Conference 2.2
  3. 3. Cohasset Associates, Inc. NOTES 2005 – ERM Software Disappears  ERM now a Feature Set of ECM  Plug in module  New set of features  The end of “awkward Integrations”  Big Players all have it  IBM  FileNET  Documentum  OpenText  TRIM keeps going EDRMS = ECM + RM ECM RM  Repository  Retention Schedule  Place to store records  What to delete, when?  Search/Retrieval  Apply retention rules to all documents  Security Control  Legal Holds  Who sees what?  Apply holds as required  Version Management  Declaration  Tracking document production/versions  “Lock Down” document to prevent deletion  Collaboration  Delete only via retention process  Who does what to the document?  Classification  Workflow  Right Retention rule applied to  Defined Process for document documents creation/approval  Disposition  Delete records per approved retention schedule  Maintain supporting Audit trail 2005 – Where are we?  Choice of RM software goes away  Buyers “inherit” ERM not Choose it  RM comes along with ECM Platform  The buyer changes  From RM to IT  Unwitting buyer = IT  Vendors now have standard “recipe” for RM  RM component = extra-$$ add-on  RM practitioners become “passengers” of ECM!2012 Managing Electronic Records Conference 2.3
  4. 4. Cohasset Associates, Inc. NOTES Suddenly….  “LOTS” of ERM “success”  Definition of success  ECM Sold & Installed with RM function  Big assumption  Sold = deployed and (presumably) adopted  RM Practitioners not happy  Could not deploy RM Capabilities  Could not understand the software  Focused on the Retention Schedule  ECM Usage without RM usage  The new reality 2005  What We Accomplished  All major ECM platforms have RIM capability  Even Oracle and HP, and boutique players  The end of “Awkward Integrations”  Sea ess Seamless RM within ECM platforms t C p at o s  Email Integration  The most important source of e-records!  Thanks to 5015.2  Standard capabilities in all products  Per 5015.2  We learned what and how to measure  Do we use it? Another story… 2005-2011  Questionable “Success”  Fuzzy definition of “success”  Better retrieval  Reduced Risk of litigation  Lower document storage cost  No way to measure success y  People Using ECM, but not Achieving RIM goals  Points of failure  No Change to user attitudes to RIM  No means of measurement  Classification accuracy too low for disposition to take place  RIM Practitioners cannot wrestle control of the software2012 Managing Electronic Records Conference 2.4
  5. 5. Cohasset Associates, Inc. NOTES Barriers  The “Big Four” 1. Organizational/Cultural Change  Need to achieve a change in business practice 2. Classification Accuracy  Need to maintain 85% or better 3. 3 RIM Admin Proficiency  RIM Practitioners need to understand and control the software 4. Measurement  No way to measure project success or failure Beware….. User Reluctance is extreme… Beyond Anything You Can Imagine  It’s MY document  This is too much work Declare that Document!  It s It’s not my job  It takes too long  I have a better way  I Don’t need this “Filing a document into a records repository is an unnatural act” R. Medina, 2000 Declaration = Q + C + M Qualify/Classify/Metadata (QCM) Field 1 A Field 2 A1 A2 Field 3 A11 A11 Field 4 Field5 WIP Classify y Qualify Record Metadata Reference Copyright RIMtech 20122012 Managing Electronic Records Conference 2.5
  6. 6. Cohasset Associates, Inc. NOTES Classification Errors  Errors Rapidly Accumulate!  No way to correct  MUST maintain accuracy above acceptable threshold Cumulative Effect of Classification Errors Declared Accuracy Classifications Day Records % Right Wrong Mon 5,000 70% 3,500 1,500 Tue 5,000 80% 4,000 1,000 Wed 5,000 60% 3,000 2,000 Thu 5,000 70% 3,500 1,500 Fri 5,000 75% 3,750 1,250 Cumulative Total 17,750 7,250 Effect of Classification Accuracy Disposition Confidence 120 100 Confidence % Confidence in Disposition Range 80 60 Disposition Confidence 40 20 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Classification Accuracy (%) 2007- 2012  Microsoft Goes for RM  2007 – Big Miss  10% of minimum needed  2010 – Near Miss  72% of minimum needed  What was Missed?  Disposition  Case File Handling2012 Managing Electronic Records Conference 2.6
  7. 7. Cohasset Associates, Inc. NOTES SharePoint vs F1000 vs 5015.2 US DoD 5015.2 (168) Fortune 1000 (105) SharePoint Out Of Box (72) Copyright RIMtech 2012 Case Vs Subject Delete 02/06 02/07 02/08 02/09 02/10 02/11 Subject File Travel Requests Delete After 4 years Delete 02/03 02/04 02/05 02/06 02/07 02/08 Case File Contract / Safe -Tee Delete 2 years after contract end Copyright RIMtech 2012 Deletion vs Disposition Deletion Disposition  Machine-Driven  Process-Driven  Everything assumed to  Human Oversight Assumed be perfect  Authoritative Source =  No Authoritative Source Retention Schedule  Delete when 2 years old  What is approved by Whom  Initiation by machine  Initiation by People2012 Managing Electronic Records Conference 2.7
  8. 8. Cohasset Associates, Inc. NOTES SharePoint gets Rescued  3rd-Party Plug-ins  Canada X 2  Collabware  Orangutech  USA X 1  GimmalSoft 5015.2 certified!  Australia X 2  RecordPoint  I5  Will SharePoint 2014 Get there?  5015.2 – Not Likely  Minimum Requirements - Likely ERM  Our Achilles Heel  Classification Accuracy  Need to hit 85%+  Little Progress to date  Major point of failure Understanding RIM (Records & Information Management)  (5) Huge Changes 1. New Place to store documents  No More File Servers! 2. How we Store documents  Fill out a form – every time! 3. How we Find documents 4 Documents get Deleted 4. 5. Things are Organized  Names, Places Rules are enforced  Disruption  More time/work to store a document  Documents Disappear!  New rules  What to store, where to store  New Software to learn  ECM2012 Managing Electronic Records Conference 2.8
  9. 9. Cohasset Associates, Inc. NOTES Barrier 1  Organizational/Cultural Change  Accomplished to Date  Greater Awareness  IM and RM Linking  What We Need to Achieve  Management Engagement  More than just passive “Support”  70%+ of project $$/Resources dedicated to organizational/Cultural change  RM and IM as a seamless unit We are Need to be Here Here Transform Users Perception of RIM Typical Attitude Target Attitude  Recordkeeping is not important  Recordkeeping is very important  This does not involve me to us  This is just (another) ignored  I will do my part policy  The organization is serious about  It does not matter if I ignore this this  Nobody else cares, why should I?  There are consequences if I ignore this  Others seem to care about this! Changing the Perception 4 Contributors 1. Raise RIM Visibility  Permanent – Not going away! 2. Management Participation  Active, participative engagement 3. Marketing Program  Education  This is what EDRMS Means…  Messaging  Our New Way of doing Business! 4. Policy Backstop  Non-Negotiable. These are our business rules  We have to do this. Not an option.2012 Managing Electronic Records Conference 2.9
  10. 10. Cohasset Associates, Inc. NOTES Barrier 2  Classification Accuracy  Accomplished to Date  Retention Schedule Simplification/Consolidation  SAC Software gaining traction  What We Need to Achieve  Lean Mean Retention Schedules  Commercial Adoption of SAC We are Need to be Here Here File Plan Retention Schedule Classification Retention Rule 1 Safety Safety Retention Rule 2 Doc 1 Inspections Rule Inspections 1 Retention Rule 3 Safety Doc 2 Retention Rule 4 Policy Incidents Rule 3 Retention Rule 5 Safety Finance Doc 3 Inspections p Retention Rule 6 Rule 1 Budgets Retention Rule 7 Budgets Doc 4 Rule Retention Rule 8 5 Audits Travel Retention Rule 9 Reports Doc 5 Travel Rule 8 Retention Rule 10 Travel Doc 6 Policy Requests Retention Rule 11 Rule 8 Retention Rule 12 Reports Classification Accuracy How to Measure  Statistical Sampling  Delegate to departments  Aggregate organizational total Classification Accuracy Sample Sizing Sample Size Declared 2% 5% 10% 15% 100 2 5 10 15 500 10 25 50 75 1,000 20 50 100 150 5,000 100 250 500 750 10,000 200 500 1,000 1,5002012 Managing Electronic Records Conference 2.10
  11. 11. Cohasset Associates, Inc. NOTES (SAC) System Assisted Classification  Content Analysis  Based on Sophisticated Content Search technology  Goal  Zero User Input  Faceted Taxonomies  Based on sophisticated data mapping and analysis technology  Goal  Minimum User Input Substantial Pre-Implementation Configuration/Setup is Required! Content Analysis SAC  How it Works  Compute what document is about  Seek file plan match  Suggest category  Two Examples  OpenText Auto-Classification  Integro IEM  Requires EXTREME setup  10-20 docs/category  Does not handle case files OpenText Auto-Classification 0 Copyright RIMtech 20122012 Managing Electronic Records Conference 2.11
  12. 12. Cohasset Associates, Inc. NOTES OpenText Automatic Classification Faceted Taxonomy SAC  How it works  Name + Role + Content Type + metadata  Uses thesaurus  Adds content and context “facets” to docs as metadata  Derived from pre-defined rules of business activities  Facet = metadata elements describing the document. Opposite of hierarchical taxonomy  Search and navigate the facets with Thesaurus assist  Used to assign best-fit classification for RM  Requires EXTREME Setup Barrier 3  RIM Administrator Proficiency  Accomplished to Date  Nothing!  What We Need to Achieve  Better Vendor Training  3rd-Party Training  Software access for RIM Practitioners  Books/Seminars/Courses We are Need to be Here Here2012 Managing Electronic Records Conference 2.12
  13. 13. Cohasset Associates, Inc. NOTES RIM Administration Someone has to Fly This Plane…  Who’s in Charge?  Two pilots (ECM, RIM)  IT flies the ECM, RM flies the RIM  Some common control…  RIM Responsibilities  Key decisions on Declare/Classify Two Control Columns  Load in File Plan  Configure all aspects of Recordkeeping RIM ECM capabilities  Ongoing measurement of (3) measures  Carry out Disposition  Go-To resource for all things RIM Product related  Deep product RIM know-how Mastering the RIM Capabilities 168+ capabilities  TWO types of training  What buttons to push – not helpful  How to apply – helpful!  Can you handle it?  There is a LOT to learn for “master” level  5 days training for RM admin  10 days trial-by-fire  Cannot rely on software vendors  Few true RM specialists  This is secondary learning only!  There are no books!  Rely on outside help to supplement internal deficiencies  Only a live implementation will make you proficient  Plan/budget for training + Learning time  You also have to learn the ECM as well (although not as deep) Learn by doing The RIM Learning RoadMap 1. Elements of file plan/Retention Schedule 2. Import/Export 3. Declare/Classify methods and capabilities 4. Security and Configuration 5. Metadata configuration and setup 6. 6 Auditing 7. Lifecycle Management, Codes, Phases 8. Search Queries 9. Legal Holds 10. Disposition 11. Physical Records Management (PRM) 12. Reporting Invest in Learning2012 Managing Electronic Records Conference 2.13
  14. 14. Cohasset Associates, Inc. NOTES RIM Effort/Contribution Do You Have Sufficient Time? RIM Effort (Days/Week) Stage # Step Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1 Project Governance 1 2 Corporate Policies 1 2 1 1 0.5 Organization 3 Perception Transformation 0.5 0.5 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 4 Plan/strategy 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 5 Records Foundation 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 6 RIM Administration 1 1 1 1 1 4 2 2 2 2 1 1 Procedures 7 Business procedures 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 8 Repository Governance 0.5 0.1 9 Sandbox 1 2 2 2 10 Declaration 1 1 1 1 Technology 11 End User Training 1 1 12 Pilot 0.5 0.5 TOTAL 4.7 4.7 4.2 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.3 5 5 5 4.5 4.5 Copyright RIMtech 2012 Changing the RIM Job Role  New Skills  Evangelize the Project. Be out front and highly visible  Project Management contribution  Be the EDRMS RIM Software “Ninja”. Be the expert.  How best to Declare/Classify  New Responsibilities  Manage the critical numbers (Qualification, Declaration rate, Classification Accuracy)  Set the acceptable standard  Measure and Publish them  Influence Auto-Delete Decisions  Motivate end users  Keep executive team motivated and updated.  New Tasks  Keep the (3) critical numbers healthy  Regular status reporting  Conduct Disposition of electronic records  Divest  Divest all aspects of prior responsibilities that cannot be carried any longer Barrier 4  Measurement  Accomplished to Date  We know the (3) measures  Qualification Rate, Declaration Rate, Classification Accuracy Rate  We’re not using them!  What We Need to Achieve  Software Measurement Tools  Relentless Daily Measurement  Standards Adoption (5015.2, ISO….) We are Need to be Here Here2012 Managing Electronic Records Conference 2.14
  15. 15. Cohasset Associates, Inc. NOTES Measurement Metrics Critical to Project Success 1. Qualification Rate  Are users selecting the right documents to manage as records?  Are we seeing an appropriate quantity? 2. Declaration Rate  Once qualified, are users storing them as managed records? 3. 3 Classification Rate  What % of declared records have the correct retention rule assigned?  We MUST achieve all 3 metrics!  We need to measure all three!  Entire project “rolls up” to these three metrics! Managing the Metrics Finance Actual Classification target Actual Declaration target Actual Qualification target 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Department Corporate Metric Finance HR Engineering Legal Average Target Actual Target Actual Target Actual Target Actual Qualification 5% 4.0% 5% 4.1% 10% 11.4% 50% 36.2% 15% Declaration 90% 88.0% 95% 85.0% 80% 74.0% 90% 91.0% 86% Classification 95% 88.0% 75% 66.0% 80% 72.0% 95% 97.0% 83% Copyright RIMtech 2012 Where to From Here?  Need progress on the Big Four  Start with Measurement  ARMA is contributing  Book  Webinars  RM and IT Need to come closer together  Microsoft SharePoint  Getting Better  Could be significant game changer  3rd Party Plug-ins are kingmakers right now2012 Managing Electronic Records Conference 2.15
  16. 16. Cohasset Associates, Inc. NOTES Reaching Our Goals Disposition This cannot be done unless the Disposition – The End Game Goal bottom (3) layers happen! Classify Them (correctly) Third How do we make sure classification accuracy rate > 95%? How are we going to get 1,000 users Declare the Records Second to do this, reliably and consistently? Qualify First Which Documents are Records? Three Stage Strategy Te c h n o lo g y Third Implement the new procedures in the EDRMS B u s in e s s Change our Business P ro c e d u re s Second Procedures to fit the new rules C o r p o r a t e P o lic y First Change the rules of our Business Mandates / Regulations A New Approach to ERM Implementation 11. User Training 12. Pilot Stage 3 - Technology 9. Sandbox 10. Declaration 7. Business Processes 8. Repository Governance Stage 2 – Procedures 5. Records Foundation 6. RIM Administration 3. Perception Transformation 4. Plan/Strategy Stage 1 - Organization 1. Project Governance 2. Corporate Policies2012 Managing Electronic Records Conference 2.16
  17. 17. Cohasset Associates, Inc. NOTES Stakeholder Role – RIM Practitioner  Achieve Product Proficiency  Uphill Struggle Presently  Pressure the Vendors  Get the software!  Need More Training  Grab the Stick!  RIM must drive…  Work more closely with IT  Define roles clearly  EDRMS = a New Job  New roles, responsibilities, tasks Stakeholder Role – Vendors  SAC  Bring to commercial viability  Administrator Training  Substantial development needed  Become better trainers  Development metric measurement tools  Make the software available to RIM Practitioners  Simple Installation  Full capability  Pre-Purchase Stakeholder Role – Sr. Management  Measurement Metrics must guide Projects  Combine RIM and IT  Embrace organizational/Cultural Change  A permanent Change, NOT a project!  RIM Personnel need more resources, not less2012 Managing Electronic Records Conference 2.17
  18. 18. Cohasset Associates, Inc. NOTES Stakeholder Role – IT Managers  Recognize – RIM Controls the “Stick”  IT keeps it in the air  Recognize – Out of Box does not work!  Embrace measurement metrics  Then work backward to develop tools to support the measures  Get the software to the RIM practitioners  They need to learn!  A permanent change – not a Project!  Build effective declaration techniques  To support metrics We will get there!  Accomplished to Date 1. Software has everything we need 2. SAC coming along 3. Greater awareness 4. Leaner Retention Schedules  What We Need to Achieve 1. 1 RIM Admin Proficiency Proficienc 2. Application of measurement metrics 3. Organizational/Cultural Change 4. 85%+ Classification accuracy We are Need to be Here Here Bruce Miller bruce.miller@rimtech.ca www.rimtech.ca 613-226-84682012 Managing Electronic Records Conference 2.18

×