Speaking Truth to SharePoint

Current Rating:
(0 ratings)

We all know the first signs that our politicians are not being entirely candid -- when their lips move. We all know that banks get robbed because that's where the money is -- even by their own bankers. Our powers of BS detection are tested and strengthened each day when elected officials, corporate leaders, and attention-starved celebrities keep two separate ledgers: (1) their words, and (2) deeds.

The journalism industry may never recover but exposing hypocrisy is as much a winning business model as a self-protective impulse that keeps our 'honest' doubts in line with our 'reasonable' expectations.

So how do we keep our BS detectors in working order during SharePoint deployments? After all, there's so much to sift through -- even in our gated AIIM group of bloggers -- that the volume of pros and cons overwhelms those vows we make to stand our middle ground. To see the trade-offs from false choices. To map the platform to the business. Period.

It always helps to lower the degrees of separation from trade show evangelists to the unassuming PMO types. BS levels drop when we're dealing with working stiffs like me. That's because we don't seek the victory of a sales closing. We crave the solace of living within our system choices. That doesn't mean every Microsoft Gold Partner is a slick car salesman with an ECAL sticker. But it does mean that back office cost centrists care more about war stories than case studies.

The war bit informs our BS detection settings. Just because a fact-finding mission is about reaching a sensible decision doesn't mean we only buy into level-headed rationales. I'm much likelier to believe a SharePoint partisan who alternatively both loves and hates the product with the passion of a user, and producer ... AND implementer.  

That contempt earns a lot of cred -- even integrity -- because the cost of guessing wrong is an investment beyond the terms of any licensing deal. I too have been prone to overextend  the merits of FAST Enterprise Server. The READ ONLY column values in MOSS flew the coop in SharePoint 2010. I have the scars. And no expert blog can shield us from our own naievete.

But that insistent hope is not delusional. It comes from a D-I-Y perspective that we don't need Gold Partners or even internal IT to work around those missing pieces. To put my fervent hot and cold SharePoint spells in perspective, McKinsey Management Consulting recently published a thought piece entitled: Seven Steps to Better Brainstorming. In it authors Kevin and Shawn Coyne argue the case to bake in the constraints of creative problem-solving before the group holes up in some windowless bunker retreat:

A bank we know wasted a full day’s worth of brainstorming because the session’s best ideas all required changing IT systems. Yet senior management—unbeknownst to the workshop planners—had recently “locked down” the IT agenda for the next 18 months.

What these organizational capital guys didn't add to the mix is the fact that SharePoint changes the game completely. The habitual rigidity that comes with ECM planning is now a fluid, open, and potentially solvable series of incremental tweaks. We're no longer rulebound to legacy systems or hostage to outdated architectures.

If the message was coming from Apple, the clarion gladiators at Steve Jobs' sandals would herald in this liberation across the parting clouds.

But Microsoft is ... well ... ummm ... agreeing that the cloud is the way to go!

Like I said, it's a love, hate thing.

Report

Rate Post

You need to log in to rate blog posts. Click here to login.

Add a Comment

You need to log in to post messages. Click here to login.

Comments

Daniel O'Leary

If Apple had announced this...

Marc you are right, I think if Apple or Steve Jobs had announced the same products, I probably would have written a post about how it was the greatest thing ever.

I dropped SP 2007 last summer, and haven't had a chance to really evaluate 2010. Granted in my mind that is like moving back in with an abusive spouse, but you've convinced me to be open to the idea.
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply
Chris Riley, ECMp, IOAp

Dan no excuse now

I'm going to be all over you to test 2010 now :)
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply

Kevin Parker

SharePoint 2010 is a step in the right direction...

SharePoint 2010 is a step in the right direction, even for many of us who jumped ship from the Microsoft stack years ago. I couldn't stand SharePoint 2007 so I moved to other leaner and more "agile" tools for content and knowledge management (I had dropped .NET for leaner dev languages, too). After helping an enterprise implement SharePoint 2010 from within, I am now a full-time SharePoint Architect, helping clients get the most out of it based on their real business needs.

I also personally refuse to work for a Microsoft vendor (or any vendor) for exactly what you state here: Credibility. Yes, I'm working with clients who have already chosen SharePoint, but I'm under no obligation to push other MS products—I get to help them build a suite of tools that meets their needs and budget.
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply

Christian Buckley

In the trenches

With SharePoint (in every permeation) there are two truths: 1)Microsoft is really good at marketing, and 2) Learning comes from doing. While the platform is very powerful and flexible, the mistake most people make is assuming its easier than it really is. That's where the love/hate comes in.

If more businesses would take your advice to "map the platform to the business," we'd see less churn and frustration with the platform, because people would make more sensible decisions about what is needed, and what is possible.
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply
Bryant Duhon

Doesn't everyone make this mistake?

Just wondering: Christian/Marc, of course you are both right when you say that one needs to "map the platform to the business." However, seems to me from my years on the sidelines; editing, writing, and talking to folks like yourselves; this isn't unique to SharePoint or Microsoft (putting product before figuring out what, exactly, to do with it).

So, why the vitriol against SP, because, to be fair, this isn't really a SharePoint specific problem? Do you think because the product was from Microsoft that there was an expectation that ECM would be as easy to use as a word processing program? And/or does MS deserve blame because of the marketing message, which has, or at least seems to have, implied that ECM is easy.
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply
Jeremy Thake

"leave SharePoint alone"

SAP has been around for a lot longer than SharePoint and has the same issues. The difference is, Microsoft seem to make a lot more noise about their platform...the community online is a lot bigger and a lot more noise. Maybe there is a lesson to learn from SAP crowd...or maybe not :-) Analysts love attacking SharePoint and Microsoft.

The "tradefloor evangelists" dig was a little low. A lot of these people work at vendors where they are working with large Enterprise Organisations. I for one am getting a lot more exposure to issues in larger organizations than I was as a consultant where you're stuck on one or two gigs for minimum 6 months. I am fortunate enough to be reaching CIO's, CTO's, IT managers and talking about their problems...albiet to see whether our software can help them...but still hearing this. As a consultant I might hit one problem in a project or be so isolated on one part of SharePoint I don't see the big picture. Evangelists also have more time to speak to customers than a billable consultant does who is focusing on one task. Don't know this role and accuse of "BS".
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply

Doug Hemminger

I value the input of Consultants, Evangalists, and Third Party Vendors

Putting aside the disappointng lack of perfundity, I disagree with (my understanding of) this article's main point.

Confusion...

The title of the article is "Speaking Truth to SharePoint" but what truth are you espousing?.

Should we map the platform to the business? That truth is self-evident and can broadly be applied to any configurable software product. It's hardly a truth unique to SharePoint.

Should we be able to live within the solace of our system choices? What solace? If I wanted solace, I would eradicate the users. Solace has nothing to do with my system choices. If you are saying that I should be able to live confidently with my system choices rather than walk away from them at the end of an engagement (as some consultants might), then say that. But isn't that obvious?

"To see the trade-offs from false choices". huh? If the choices are false (interpret incomplete or misrepresented), how can there be trade-offs that I should see from those choices.

To the point...

It sounds like you are trying to say that a SharePoint deployment is a complicated dance of competing interests that is often disrupted by the noise of consultants, third-party vendors and evangalists. It sounds like you think the people in the trenches--the ones making day-to-day decisions during a SharePoint deployment--have to stick to the middle-ground and appease the "back office cost centrists" in such a way that allows them to live with their choices--all while sifting through disruptive and confusing messages from outside parties.

My thoughts...

What I find troubling about this article is not the effort required to sift through meaningless phrases and obtuse wording to understand your point, but the point itself (as I udnerstand it). A lot goes into a SharePoint deployment (as you point out). Mapping the platform to the business is a complicated venture in even the simplest scenarious. Evangalists, Consultants, and Third party vendors add value to the process, when called up and used appropriately. Evangalists help the person working in the trenches understand the platform. Consultants help with everything from simple tactical considerations to the strategic, overarching "mapping the platform to the business". Third party vendors help fill the needs of the business where the platform falls short or is an incomplete solution.

The truth is: SharePoint is a complicated product. The business processes that it is supposed to support are complicated. Marrying the two into a symbiotic relationship can be an extraordinarily difficult task. Use your resources wisely and it becomes easier. Don't use your resources or don't use them wisely and it becomes more difficult.
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply

This post and comment(s) reflect the personal perspectives of community members, and not necessarily those of their employers or of AIIM International