Five Reasons Your ECM System May Never Be Deployed

Welcome to the 82%. If you are like most organizations that have purchased an enterprise content management system (ECM) you have not deployed your software. According to Forrester Research, only 18% percent of ECM projects ever make it into full production (a moment to point out the obvious: 82% do NOT reach full production). While the data is sketchy, we have seen roughly equivalent deployment rates for email archiving systems (other than basic functionality such as journaling, but not full deployment).

In my travels, I talk to many records managers and IT folks involved in ECM or archival. I always ask how their initiative is faring. “We bought an ECM/Email Archiving/Records Management system nine months ago” is what I typically hear. Installed I ask? “Yes.” In production I ask? “Not yet.” And that “not yet” period can span from months to literally years.

While there are a number of reasons for this lack of deployment, let’s eliminate some red herrings. First, today’s economic environment and lack of funding for IT and records management is not, in my opinion, a major factor. Yes, staff reductions mean remaining staff are being asked to do more with fewer resources. Nevertheless, we’ve seen consistent lack of deployment long before our current economic problems. Unproven technology? Not the case here either. These types of content management systems have been around for years, and there are many, many organizations which have been successful in deploying them.

Why the lack of deployment then? Your mileage may vary, but here are my top five reasons on how to ensure your ECM system is never deployed.

Reason #5: Focus on Benefits Just to IT or Records Management
IT bought the archive for “IT reasons” including compliance with policy initiatives, reduction in storage, better mailbox management, saving on disk space, eliminating the need to upgrade the email server, etc. All great benefits for IT. Problem is that the rest of the business believes the old way of saving everything forever, wherever worked just fine, and what exactly is it that IT wants me to do with my files? If the rest of the business doesn’t see benefits to your new approach, it is unlikely they will want to play in your new sandbox.

Do ensure your system is never deployed, only “sell” the benefits of this system for IT and records management and how it will help your function.

Reason #4: Address E-discovery Late in the Process
E-discovery is a major driver in document retention strategy, running both hot and cold. Sometimes the edict comes down from legal to save everything. Sometimes legal wants to delete everything. Sometimes legal can’t decide. The point is, retention strategies are not always in sync with e-discovery priorities. When not in the loop, legal can and often does put a stop to the deployment.

The advice here for halting deployment is to only address e-discovery and litigation hold issues very late in the process, typically after the ECM system has been purchased and limit discussions with legal.

Reason #3: Don’t Address Legacy Data
Our own research at Contoural shows that for every “current” document in an Exchange Server or on a file share, there are 14 other older, legacy documents in PST files, laptop hard drives, local archives, etc. Too often the initial deployment of ECM systems is focused on these current documents, and no real plan is in place to address the legacy data. We have found that if addressed properly, around 80% of the legacy data can be defensibly deleted, and the remaining 20% should be put in an archive. Stakeholders often intuitively know this, and are reluctant to start archiving the current documents without addressing the legacy information. From their perspective, the legacy documents represent equal risk and cost as the current documents, so why only deploy 1/14th of a solution. So as you are getting ready not to deploy your ECM system, don’t address legacy data.

Reason #2: Don’t Develop a Consensus on Retention
Business units and other stakeholders often have a very different opinion than IT and records management on how long documents should be saved. Organizations that develop retention policies based exclusively on regulatory compliance without input or consensus from the rest of the business may find that no one (other than records management and IT) want to follow the policy, nor are they willing to use the ECM system to – in their opinion – effectively not save documents. We have found that a consensus can be achieved with business units on realistic and compliant retention periods if you talk about it. However, no discussion, no consensus, and no deployment.

Reason #1: Rely on Complex, Manual Processes
The average user creates or receives between 100 to 300 electronic documents per day. Often records managers expect users to classify which documents are records according to complex, lengthy records retention schedules. Great idea, except it won’t happen. We have found that if you classification process requires five seconds or longer (including referring to the schedule) end-users will ignore you request to classify. It doesn’t have to be this way. Many organizations are automating the retention of many of their documents, leaving users to classify only a portion of their records against simplified, user-friendly schedules. Nevertheless, some organizations continue to insist on complex, relatively time-consuming schedules. An excellent way to join the 82%.

Mark Diamond is President & CEO of Contoural, Inc. You can email Mark and markdiamond@contoural.com .

Legal Information Is Not Legal Advice
Contoural provides information regarding business, compliance and litigation trends and issues for educational and planning purposes. However, legal information is not the same as legal advice -- the application of law to an individual or organization's specific circumstances. Contoural and its consultants do not provide legal advice. Readers should consult with competent legal counsel for professional assurance that our information, and any interpretation of it, is appropriate to each reader’s particular situation.