Gungor Aydogmus talks about the state of information management and how you can improve your information lifecycle

1. Gungor Aydogmus
INFORMATION GOVERNANCE CHALLANGES JUNE 29, 2017
IT professional with over 28 years experience as a
Manager / Lead Architect/Consultant with
strength in managing and maintaining complex
ECM and IM. Experience includes 15 years of
onsite consulting experience in Documentum
Applications’ Content Management, Web Cache,
Web Publisher, eRoom, CTS, DCTM-SAP
integration, Scanning, Mail Integration, DPM
publishing, Annotation, and Rendition Services.
MSc Degree in Finance and BSc degree in the
Computer Information Systems
PROJECT EXPERIENCE (Content Management and
Archiving projects for the following companies in
three continents)
ABB Automation, ABB Europe, KBR, Anadarko,
Lyondell, Halliburton, PWC, VSE, AHA, CSIT, E&Y,
USA, Lexmark, CSC, DOW, MDA, PG&E, Party
Gaming, Pfizer, Ricoh, Fidelity, BP, Abbott, Red
Cross, Alcatell-Lucent, PRT, Bearing Point,
Southern Co., DTE, Disney, USPS, Cingular, AOL,
Fannie Mae, NASD, FedEx, Bombardier, SMUD,
PepsiCo., EchoStar, Country Wide, Phoenix
University, GSK, American Airlines, SAIC, OAG
Texas, HESS
© 2017 InfoDNA Solutions, LLC

2. PLEASE LET US HELP YOU!

3. Information Management Perspective Today
• Duplicate Content (40%+ content duplication is typical)
• Typically Multiple Taxonomies and Lack of Global Standards
• Pervasive Volumes of Unmanaged files on shared drives with High Compliance Risk
• Multiple ECM repositories with unsustainable amount of customization
• Multiple established systems of records for records management / compliance
• Inconsistent or zero linkage between document repositories and other data repositories
• Fluid/Dynamic/Hybrid business IT ownership of Site & File Share management tasks
• Limited user acceptance

4. Why Are We In This Situation?
• Wrong Information Structure Framework
• Incorrect file plan and Enterprise Taxonomy
• Premature adoption of a technology,
• Inadequate integration,
• Misunderstood implications of middleware dependency,
• Poor design,
• Poor architecture and engineering,
• Not taking into account Cyber security

5. 5
Today’s Reality
• Storage - Distributed
• Classification - Defaults Only
• Organization - Disorganized
• Sharing - In Siloes
• Findability - Disjointed
• Retention - Unspecified
• Process - Random
Key question: Where’s my data?

6. Knowledge worker’s life today
Find correct
info.
Never convinced that I’m
looking at the right version of
this document.
Email important? I’ll just take the
attachment and store it in shared
area or email archive.
I don’t have access to my documents when
I’m on the road.
???
I’ll send this document as an e-mail attachment
and post on SharePoint/Documentum for my
team to update.
Classification of
Info
I am not sure what to do with this so
I’ll put it wherever I prefer.
I do not know the lifecycle, or how
to dispose of this document.
Email Management
Disposition
Mobile
Collaboration
Records
Management
Boundaries between Information Management and
Records Management are unclear. Should they not be
working in tandem?

7. Knowledge worker’s life tomorrow
Find correct
info.
I am well trained to find the single
source of truth using the
standardized Taxonomy & metadata
across information management
systems
I can easily declare an email as a
record using tools like Cosi or Integro
I can access content stored in
Documentum or SharePoint from
anywhere using cloud solution -
Synplicity
I have a well defined platform where I can
collaborate where ever I am.
Classification of
Info.
All document types I use in my everyday
business process are classified
automatically
I don’t have to worry about how I am
going to dispose of record, it is
automatically done through assigned
retention code
Email Management
Disposition
Mobile
Collaboration
Smart Business
Agility
Efficiency

8. Moving from Current State Desired State
 320 TB++ of content on File Shares
doubling every 18 months
 40%+ content duplication
 Limited user trust
 Unclear business/IT ownership of Site
& File Share management tasks
Current State
 Reduced universe of Sites & File
Shares
 Governance around File Share or Site
creation
 “Single version of the truth”
 Enable users to find content
Desired State
9

9. Key Enabler: Business Work Processes to Manage Storage Locations
Through Information Lifecycle
Targeted Shared Drives &
SharePoint
All content in this drive to be
reviewed for mapping and
migration eventual
decommissioning. Any
exceptions to be moved to the
new drive
Managed Shared
Drives
Unstructured temporary
working content and
exceptions stored at the
discretion of the regional
teams per need basis
Managed
SharePoint Site(s)
All collaboration, Work-in-
progress and 3rd Party
Gateway content per need
basis
ECM
Managed & Published
Controlled Documents &
Corporate Records
WORK-IN-PROGRESS PUBLISHED
ENTERPRISE SEARCH
13

10. iContent Landscape AssessmentInfoDNATMConsultingandProductServices
iContentCollectorTM
iContent Landscape Assessment inspects local and remote file shares, SharePoint and other
sources, to collect and analyze content, identify duplicates, recursively extracts compound
content types such as PST, MSG and embedded files, and can optionally exclude and filter
content based on different criteria.
iContent Landscape Assessment Engagement
Engagement Definition
• Collaboration with Business and Information Management (IT)
• Deliverable – Report on Content
• Duplicate File Report – to assess for disposition
• File types – to assess content value
• Size of files – to determine storage needs
• File Dates Information – to determine archiving and disposition

11. Information Structure AssessmentInfoDNATMConsultingandProductServices
iContentDDSTM
Information Structure Assessment is a process to help an enterprise identify their enterprise
file plan and taxonomy, improves the change management process, and support standard
lookup values determined by the Information Governance team.
Information Structure Assessment Engagement
Engagement Definition
• Collaboration with Business and Information Management (IT)
• Deliverables:
• File Plan Current State
Includes Classification Schema Report
• Gap Analysis
• Future State Recommendations
• Implementation Roadmap - Blueprint

12. The Solution
Defensible Deletion
repository
Full-text
index
Metadat
a
Rules Creation
Similarity De-duplication
Content Verification
High fidelity,
Searhable pdf
Source /
HD Asset
S Standardize Analyze
Categorize
OptimizeO
C
A
Audit Trail
A
S
File Stats, Hash De-duplication
OCR + Digital Prep – HD Asset
Data Dictionary, Intelligence
Content Fingerprint
Intelligent Data Extraction
Template Identification
Rules Execution
C
Fingerprint Analysis & Bucketing
Similarity Analysis
Filtering Rules Enhancement
O
Progressive Classification
Content Attribution
Compression, PDF/A, Publishing
iContentCollector
Prospecting
• Inspect contents of File
Share
• Apply Filtering and
Exclusion Rules
Deduplication
• SHA1 Hash collection
• Matched files will not be
collected
Extraction
• Compressed Files,
PSTs, MSGs
• Recursive Extraction
Loading/Unloading
• Multiple Targets
• Security
• Encryption
• Post-Processing
ContentLandscapeAnalysis(iCLA™)
Information Structure
Assessment
Taxonomy
Design
Exception Handling
Migration
1
2
Classification3
4
5
ECM

13. InfoDNATM Credentials
Process Improvements
• Classified content and extracted high business value information from 2.4 million documents.
Eliminated duplicate content and low business value documents that improved search latency.
Total of 160 thousand documents were kept as company records and the remainder were available
for disposition. (Savings $17.4 million per year) – Leading Energy Company
• Converted 1.2 million land paper records to a fully electronic process and extracted key metadata
values to enhance the business process. (Reduced personnel from 88 to 40 and reduced the
manual processing time from 48 hours per inquiry to a 15 minutes with the automated process
saving $8.2 million per year) – Land Administration of Leading Energy Company
• M&A project required to process the company’s content from 17 years of existence and create a
searchable index, in essence a monetization of the historic research of the company’s key product
while enabling a full text search option. There was a 42.85% reduction in file count and 96.6%
reduction in drive volume. – Leading Chemical Company
• File classification process of 2.1 million documents resulted in the released of a total of 8 terabytes
disc space – Leading Energy Company