Posts tagged ‘lotus’

January 28, 2011

It’s Deja Vu All Over Again…

For those who’ve have been around the world of technology the last 2 decades, there are times SharePoint seems like déjà vu all over again.   The other day, I came across a Fortune article entitled “Why Microsoft Can’t Stop Lotus Notes” from 1994 discussing the hype of Lotus Notes with millions of licenses and the birth of the “groupware” category. The Fortune article quoted Ray Ozzie discussing Notes:

“The intention,” says Ray Ozzie, the program’s inventor, is to enable “people in business to collaborate with one another and to share knowledge or expertise unbounded by factors such as distance or time zone differences.” That’s a pretty good description of a product so multifaceted and versatile that it defies precise definition….

The 1996 Fortune article went on to say:

…”For customers, Lotus Notes is in a sense addictive. Notes becomes the repository for much of an organization’s corporate memory; to remove vital data once it has spent a few years accumulating in Notes would be costly and disruptive”…

Fast forward and SharePoint has slowly but surely taken over and been hyped very much the same way.  I think you could easily remove Lotus Notes and insert Microsoft SharePoint into the statements above.   Interestingly enough in 1995, Larry Ellison predicted that Notes would be the “Visicalc of groupware” (referring to the once dominant PC spreadsheet that was killed off by Lotus 1-2-3).  Well, no one talks about groupware anymore and Notes has indeed not only become Visicalc, but Lotus 1-2-3 as well.  Or perhaps there a handful of people in the world who don’t use Microsoft Office….

My interest and passion in this space began working on Notes and I followed the waves into eRoom, Documentum and eventually SharePoint like many.   More and more each enterprise deployment or solution development project have similar concerns as they did 15 years ago.  From the Fortune article: “The first challenge to rolling out a Notes system is cultural”.   Sounds familiar.  Technically, beyond understanding the business requirements, it’s still about provisioning repositories, sites, governance, backups, taxonomy, content types, etc…  As far as solution development — remember in the 90′s when people were also talking about “component software” with service based characteristics?   That’s what Notes was all about….”Notes makes such homegrown applications and the data they contain accessible throughout an organization”.   Except today it’s about composite applications, sites, communities and content all packaged into an “enterprise collaboration platform” called SharePoint (collaboration being an even broader term compared to its groupware relative).  The more consultants I talk to whose careers span 1 or more decades all tell me they’re doing the same thing they did 10-15 years ago.   Except today, we do it all on SharePoint.

On a final note, I had an interesting conversation over the weekend with someone who said Microsoft is becoming irrelevant by the day with so much hype around iPad/iPhone-like devices and Android smart phones.  My response was just the opposite.  Microsoft has actually seemed irrelevant for a number of years….and they’re now finally becoming more relevant (slowly) once again.

“I would be insane to say that Microsoft won’t be competitive….It is an awesome force in American capitalism.”  – former CEO of Lotus, Fortune Magazine 1994

August 4, 2010

What is Knowledge Management 2.0?

The following post was also featured as a “Featured Blog” on AIIM E2.0 Community during August, 2010:

Knowledge Management seems to be making a come back.  Like E2.0 or Web 2.0, KM 2.0 seems to be more about aggregating unstructured information with structured data (perhaps in a community, portal, team space, etc…).

Perhaps the explosion of applications like SharePoint have once again made organizations think about how to manage knowledge more effectively and invest time and money into related projects.   While there is a promise that platforms like SharePoint will “do it all”, organizations have to move beyond simple document sharing and leverage these all-inclusive technology platforms as a collaboration system before it can be considered a system of knowledge.  Users need to make the application part of their day-to-day as much as they live in their email inbox.  And administrators and managers of Knowledge/Information Management systems must ensure they provide the right balance of governance, tweaking/development, care/feeding, and obtain the right consulting guidance to optimize the ROI and ensure users view the technology as a productivity tool that enables them to get their jobs done better, faster, and cheaper…..  Then complete eco-systems (e.g. from IBM, Oracle, or Microsoft) can work very very well for communications, collaboration, community, and knowledge in large organization (both inside and outside the firewall).  However, for traditional ECM/RM or larger knowledge management efforts like digital libraries or e-Commerce driven websites, these all-in-one platforms just may not be the best fit (esp. in larger organizations).

The challenges most organizations face with Knowledge Management are the cost of ownership, too many repositories, different taxonomies, and too many places to search.  What we see today is really not any different than back in the 80s/early 90s with companies having 3,4, or 5 different email systems….and they realized they needed to standardize on 1 email system (novell, exchange, or notes generally).

While it seems most organizations finally have a solid handle on email systems some 10-15 years later, they need to now focus on information & knowledge management.  These systems are not well governed and users inside the organization expect a Google-like experience in spite of all these challenges.  Organizations have simply created an “information mess” in a rush to the web over the last decade.   As a result, collaboration remains difficult and KM becomes even more challenging.  No doubt KM 2.0 initiatives will fail today just like in KM 1.0 unless these same organizations think more holistically in their approach.

There is a tremendous economic benefit attempting to cleanup and consolidate different ECM systems into a single vendor platform (for the 80%) with a consistent and enterprise information architecture that organizes collaboration, information, and knowledge.  While I don’t think 1 system will do everything required by the business, 80% is pretty good … while the remaining 20% might require a more unique/tailored technology solution (be it open source or a more pricey ECM solution).


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.