Putability and Findability: How SharePoint s Managed Metadata Service Solves the Taxonomization of Information

1. Putability and Findability: How SharePoint’s Managed Metadata Service Solves the Taxonomization of Information Bill English, MVP, MCSE, MCSA, MCT CEO, English, Bleeker and Associates, Inc. Mindsharp, Summit 7 and the Best Practices Conference

2. English, Bleeker and Associates, Inc.

3. 3

4. Agenda Understanding Putability and Findability Outlining the problems with Putability and Findability in most organizations Understanding how the Managed Metadata Service resolves many of these problems

5. What is Putability Definition: The quality of putting content in the correct location with the correct metadata The degree to which we put quality information into our information management system Truths: What goes in, must come out: garbage in, garbage out Our users will resist taking the time to put quality information into the system Findability is directly impacted by our Putability practices

6. What is Findability? Definition: The quality of being locatable or navigable The degree to which objects are easy to discover or locate Truths: You can’t use what you can’t find Information that can’t be found is worthless Our customer’s can’t purchase what they can’t find Information that is hard to find is hardly used Authority, trust and findability are interwoven Key to success when working with information is findability

7. Putability, Findability & Technology Most are clueless when it comes to thinking about how information should go into SharePoint This wasn’t encouraged by the product team Collaboration has been the focus Most equate Findability with an application: buy a search application and you’ve solved findability

8. Plug it in, Turn it on and Find it! Google’s Promise

11. A robust Information Architecture solution will:1. save your company significant monies through increased efficiencies2. while simultaneously giving your organization a greater ROI on its’ Microsoft Technology Investments3. that contributes to a competitive advantage4. by making information “faster” in your organization

12. Agenda Understanding Putability and Findability Outlining the problems with Putability and Findability in most organizations Understanding how the Managed Metadata Service resolves many of these problems

13. Agenda Understanding Putability and Findability Outlining the problems with Putability and Findability in most organizations Understanding how the Managed Metadata Service resolves many of these problems

14. Inefficient ECM Systems Over 30 billion original documents are created and consumed each year Cost of documents is estimated to be as much as 15% of annual revenues 85% of documents are never retrieved 50% of documents are duplicate in some way 60% of stored documents are obsolete For every $1 spent to create the document, $10 are spent to manage it

15. Excuses for not having ECM If we need it, we can usually find it… Just send an email – someone will find it for me No one will ever sue us If we do get sued, we’ll find what we need to defend ourselves We’ve got to pick our battles $20/file a document, $120/find a misfiled document & $220 to re-produce a lost document Green/Schmeen NMP if a document is copied 19 times

16. Lack of ECM Excuses Information security isn’t at the top of our list of things to do – I trust my employees If people want to take home work, that’s a good thing! ECM is too expensive and there’s little ROI, so why invest in it? Reality: you’re already paying for a bad ECM – a good ECM will save you money through better efficiencies

17. Is Findability Understood? When asked “How well is findability understood in your organization”, the following answers were given: It is well understood and addressed: 17% It is vaguely understood: 31% Not sure how search and findability are different: 30% No clear understanding of findability at all: 22% Over half (55%) of organizations today either don’t know what findability is or they are not able to differentiate findability from search technologies Many believe that if they have a stand-alone search tool, then findability is being adequately addressed

18. Findability vs. Search Search is too-often viewed as an application-specific solution for findability Search focuses on trying to ask the right question Search focuses on “matching” keywords with content under the assumption that if I find the right word, I’ve found the right content Findability is not a technology: It is a way of managing information that is baked into the organization It is a well-defined and well-executed strategic model of consistent practices and actions Technologies contribute to an overall Findability solution, but a robust findability solution is much more than the implementation of a few technologies or applications

19. The Paradox of Findability as a Corporate Strategy When asked the degree to which Findability is critical to their overall business goals and success, 62% of respondents indicated that it is imperative or significant. Only 5% felt it had minimal or no impact on business success. Yet, 49% responded that even though Findability is strategically essential, they have no formal plan or set of goals for Findability in their organization. Of the other 51% who claimed to have a strategy, 26% reported that their strategy was ad hoc, meaning that they have no strategy at all. So: 75% have no Findability strategy, even though many believe it is strategically essential

20. The Cost of Information Work

21. Hours Wasted Per Week

22. The Cost of Poor Findability Avg number of queries per day: 20 Avg number of hours/week spent finding info: 6.5 3.5 hours spent trying to find information but not finding it 3.0 hours recreating information that you know exists, but you cannot find 6.5 hours/week = $9,750 cost/worker/year 10K workers: $97,500,000/year Too high? OK – Cut it by 90%: $9.75M/year

23. What keeps us from Finding Information? Poor search functionality: 71% Inconsistency in how we tag/describe data: 59% Lack of adequate tags/descriptors: 55% Information not available electronically: 49% Poor navigation: 48% Don’t know where to look: 48% Constant information change: 37% Can’t access the system that hosts the info: 30% Don’t know what I’m looking for: 22% Lack the skills to find the information: 22%

24. Who is responsible for tagging? Authors: 40% Records Managers: 29% SME’s: 25% Anyone: 23% Don’t know: 12% No one: 16% This means that 76% don’t know who is responsible for tagging information to make it more findable. Result of not having information governance Can’t have SharePoint governance without IG

25. Findability and ECM 29% - Sharepoint is working in conflict with other ECM systems 16% - Sharepoint is integrated with existing ECM suites 12% - It’s the only ECM suite 43% - SharePoint is used to “fill in some functions”

26. Findability and ECM 36% - IT rolls out SharePoint with no input from Record Managers or ECM teams 14% - admit that no one is in charge and that SharePoint + ECM is out of control SMS/text messages, blogs, wikis and other web 2.0 technologies lack inclusion in the ECM solution in 75% of organizations This represents a major risk to companies

27. Research Summary: We spend a lot of time looking for and re-creating information that already exists Most organizations don’t have a coherent findability solution Most organizations have not aligned SharePoint with their larger ECM needs Many organizations confuse search with findability Yet, most organizations believe that Findability is strategically important to their success

28. Other Putability/Findability Problems Information Overload Databreaches eDiscovery

30. Information Overload False Premise: More information is better. True Premise: We need the right information at the right time Information overload reduces findability The number of sources of information is bewildering: Books, magazines, newspapers, billboards, blogs, wikis, web sites, telephone, television, video, email, text messages, instant messages, music, social networks, conversations, etc….

31. Information Overload $900 Billion cost to the economy in 2008 (WSJ) 54% of us report feeling a “high” when we find information that we’re looking for 80% of us feel “driven to gather as much information as possible to keep up with customers and competitors”

32. Information Overload Research Study at Kings College in London: Information overload harms concentration more than smoking marijuana IQ dropped by 10 points during information overload while smoking pot dropped IQ’s by 5 points

33. Information Overload Over half of us report experiencing email fatigue Spend 1.5 hours/day processing emails. 20% spend over 3 hours/day processing emails 67% process emails outside of work hours “Sheer overload” is reported to be the biggest problem with email Findability is harmed

34. Information Overload Psychiatrist Ed Hallowell: Attention Deficit Trait (ADT) Have too much input – more than you can possibly manage Make decisions quickly – without reflection Push the “close door” button repeatedly in the elevator Can’t manage as well as you’d like Try harder and harder to keep up Addicted to speed

35. Regulatory Breaches 35 states have laws requiring that individuals be notified if their confidential or personal data has been lost, stolen or compromised. Privacy Rights Clearinghouse has identified more than 215 million records of U.S. Residents that have been exposed due to security breaches since 2005

36. 2007 Study by Ponemon Institute Avg cost of a data breach is $197/record 43% increase from 2005 Avg total cost per reporting company: $6.3M Cost of lost business accelerates: Increased from 2005 at 30%, avg $4.1M/company and $128/record compromised. Lost business now accounts for 65% of data breach costs compared to 56% in 2006 study.

37. 2007 Study Continued Third-party breaches (contractors, consultants, partners & vendors) Accounted for 40% of the data breaches – up from 29% in 2006 & 21% in 2005 Most costly: $231/record

38. CheckPoint Study 2009 #1 threat to company’s network security: employees who inadvertently expose confidential information Hackers were #5 Mobile devices were #12 Competitor espionage #14

39. E-Discovery and FindabilityAmendments to the Federal Rules on Civil Procedure Amended December 1, 2006 – adds electronic files Significant departure from paper-based discovery rules Complicates findability, data storage and exposure to liability

40. What is E-Discovery? Electronic discovery (e-Discovery) refers to “any process in which electronic data is sought, located, secured, and searched with the intent of using it as evidence in a civil or criminal legal case”. This includes but is not limited to computer forensics, email archiving, online review, and proactive management. The emergent e-Discovery field augments legal, constitutional, political, security, and personal privacy issues.

41. When does eDiscovery happen? The term discovery refers to the gathering of information for use as evidence in a legal action. A company’s legal department must locate, collect, review and produce responsive documents if a civil suit is filed against them, even if the matter is settled or dismissed before trial. eDiscovery is the identification, retrieval and review of electronically stored information (ESI) Process involves legal team and IT High-risk, high-expense operation, involving very high labor costs, expensive outside consultation, and/or broad-reaching preservation orders impacting IT systems The term discovery refers to the gathering of information for use as evidence in a legal action. A company’s legal department must locate, collect, review and produce responsive documents if a civil suit is filed against them, even if the matter is settled or dismissed before trial. eDiscovery is the identification, retrieval and review of electronically stored information (ESI) Process involves legal team and IT High-risk, high-expense operation, involving very high labor costs, expensive outside consultation, and/or broad-reaching preservation orders impacting IT systems

42. 42 Electronic Discovery IT and security teams are expected to help with the management of such information Processes: creation, storage, archival, and destruction Security objectives: availability, confidentiality, and integrity Organizations will need closer ties between legal and IT groups to create improved policies and infrastructure Sometimes you might be a third party to the case but still may have important information Banks are often in this situation If you have reasonable expectation to be involved in a case, then you have a duty to preserve evidence

43. 43 E-Discovery Risks are Real There are many horror stories about adverse judgments when ESI isn’t preserved Past rulings have resulted in millions/billions in penalties Philip Morris (emails not saved: $2.75M fines, witnesses barred) Bank of America Securities (slow to produce emails and records; inaccurate statements about ESI: $10M fine to SEC) Morgan Stanley (backup tapes not disclosed: judge allowed jury to infer fraud; $1.5B judgment – in review) 28% of organizations will take more than a month to produce documents for e-discovery

44. 44 Solution ValidationeDiscovery is (still) mission critical

45. Early Disclosure Discussions Outline preservation steps undertaken Difficulty to locate and preserve is not an excuse Preservation Policies ? Retention Policies Retention: winnow out unneeded info Preservation: retain info pertinent to the proceedings Lack of agreement on Preservation methods and scope often results in court orders Difficulty to locate and preserve is not an excuse

46. E-Discovery and SharePoint Check with legal dept about what information should be findable and by whom in a legal proceeding. Take their results as part of the business requirements for your SharePoint farm Develop technical & governance req’s Implement and monitor Legal should use Search to help discover non-compliance

47. Agenda Understanding Putability and Findability Outlining the problems with Putability and Findability in most organizations Understanding how the Managed Metadata Service resolves many of these problems

48. MMS – in a Nutshell Content type distribution system Enables enterprise-wide CT usage Retains local control and extensibility Pull technology Enterprise taxonomy development Allows global taxonomy to be enforced Allows local growth of the taxonomy Allows taxonomy to be developed over time Flexible, extensible, “smart”

49. MMS Impact

51. The MMS is about Putability, not Findability