18 March / April 2011 Elearning!
CollaborativeThinking
icrosoft is a large company with most of the Fortune 500 as customers. It often sells enter-prise licenses to customers and bundles SharePoint (for free).
But free is not always free. There are lots of challenges with SharePoint (mostly for SharePoint 2007, but some issues from the newest version of SharePoint 2010).
Although it is sold by Microsoft as a collaboration tool, it has very little collaborative func-tionality. Here is my definition of collaboration (which has stood for the last 10 years): “Collaboration is multiple coordinated interactions occurring between two or more people that include the transfer of complex information for some common purpose or goal.”
SharePoint is most often used as a portal to share content inside the organization. IT departments often are sold on the Microsoft collaboration story, of which SharePoint is a part, but the company also wants you to buy other Microsoft Servers like OCS and Exchange (e-mail) server to get the whole collaborative solution. For most organizations, the cost for all of these servers and the people to support them is in the millions.
It is no surprise that Microsoft is a dominant player in the enterprise collaboration marketplace with more than 100 million licenses (more licenses than Lotus Notes). However, the AIIM 2008 report shows that only 38 percent use it for the enterprise while 70 percent use it at the departmental level.
SHAREPOINT STRENGTHS
>>
Lots of capabilities/features>>
From a big, well-known software company>>
IT usually has a prior relationship with Microsoft>>
Integrates with MS Office and Exchange>>
Granular security model>>
Reasonable document repository>>
Alerts (delivered by e-mail) that allow you to attach any stage of a workflow, risk, issues, deliver-ables and calendar events>>
Dashboards, with which you can roll up mile-stones from different projects for management view>>
Incorporates FAST’s search technology to make search more granularWHY ARE MOST ENTERPRISES USING SHAREPOINT?
>>
It is the easiest route for the IT department.>>
It insures that IT is continually needed to deal with SharePoint.>>
Although it is a good choice for IT, it is not always the best choice for the employees.>>
It does integrate with MS Office well, and the enter-prise already has an investment there.>>
If the enterprise puts a lot of resources into customizing SharePoint, it is harder to move away and also limits the value of this investment.PART ONE OF A TWO-PART SERIES
BY DAVID COLEMAN
M
Elearning! March / April 2011 19
>>
SharePoint supports “governance and compliance” even more so in the 2010 version.>>
Ribbon editing control and Ajax inline editing has been added, which makes content editing easy and more intuitive for end-users ( if you are used to the ribbon in Office 2007).>>
SharePoint 2010 now supports Managed Meta Data Services that allows creating and managing the meta tags across multiple sites. Meta data-tagged content can be further used to dynamically position content for the site audience, using the new Audience Object Model, which allows Audience objects to target specific content to the target audience.>>
A SharePoint HTML editor has been added.>>
SharePoint now offers reusable workflows. Choose between simple (serial) or sophisticated (parallel) workflow or customized workflow to suit your organizations content approval needs.>>
SharePoint also offers inbuilt Web analytics to understand how your Website may be performing. It shows the regular KPIs (key performance indicators) for Website monitoring.SHAREPOINT CHALLENGES
Now that we have talked about the strengths of SharePoint and why it is so widely adopted by the enter-prise, let’s look at some of the challenges. SharePoint Challenges break down into five areas:
1)
getting started2)
the SharePoint ArchitecturePortal Site Templates
Site Definitions
My Site Personal Site
Social Networking
Privacy Controls
Site and Documents Roll-Up Web Part
Colleagues and Memberships Web Part
Single Sign-On (SSO)
Content Search Experience
Relevance
Uniform, Scalable User Experience
Content Sources
People and Expertise Searching
Business Data Search
Seach Manageability
Indexing Management
Content Scopes
Extensibility and Programmability
Common Search Technology &
Infrastructure
Built on the XML Industry Standards
Browser Based Forms
powered by InfoPath Forms Services
“Design Once” Development Model
Form Import Wizard
Advanced “No-Code” Form Features
Integrated Deployment Model for
“No-Code” forms
Native Support for Web Services &
Customer-defined Schemas
Multiple View Forms
Design Checker
Rich Administration Options
for Form Deployment &
Management
Document
InfoPath Workflow Forms
Document Information Panel
Document Converters
Records
Policy and Auditing
Records Repository
Search and Process
Web
Page and Site Communications
Portal Content and Branding
Customization
VAriations and Multi-Language Sites
Deploying Content Between Servers
Page Publishing usingDocument
Converters
Web Publishing and Development
Business Data Catalog
Business Data SharePoint Lists
& Web Parts
Business Data Actions
Data Connections Libraries
Dashboards
Report Center Web Sites
Excel Services
Web Access to Workbooks
Programmatic Access to Workbooks
Integrated, Flexible Publishing
Excel Services Management
Data Connection Libraries
Portal
Search
Content Management
Business Processes
Business Intelligence
Microsoft Office
SharePoint Server 2007
Feature = New
Feature = Enhanced
SharePoint has 5 Groups of capabilities: Search, Content management, Workflow, Business intelligence, Portal
SharePoint
has a steep
learning
curve that
can lower
adoption
and use
dramatically.
20 March / April 2011 Elearning!
3)
functional challenges4)
social and collaborative challenges5)
training, maintenance and TCO issuesMicrosoft SharePoint is a complex tool with lots of capabilities. It has a steep learning curve that can lower adoption and use dramatically. We did in-depth interviews with almost 50 employees of an 8,000-employee client company, and about 35 of them had issues with or no love of
SharePoint. They were only using it because they had no other option. In some cases, different groups got so frustrated that they went out and found another (SaaS) collaboration tool, which required no server or license (subscription-based), less or no training, and no interaction with IT.
GETTING STARTED
Getting started with SharePoint can be a very com-plex process. In looking at Microsoft’s pages for SharePoint 2007 deployment, it recommends 381 tasks, 129 days, and nine different roles (business ana-lyst, creative designer, trainer, infrastructure specialist, developer, and architect) to implement SharePoint.
It also requires active directory, IIS, .net framework, SQL server databases, anti-virus software for the server, and the Microsoft Deployment Plan.
SharePoint server is composed of:
>>
Web front-end role that processes HTTP requests to the server;>>
An application layer that provides such features as Search and Excel Services;>>
A dedicated Microsoft SQL Server data storage.The licensing process itself is also very complex. Another (hardware) client was looking at converting from Lotus Notes to Microsoft (with additional func-tionality, including SharePoint, Exchange, OCS, etc.). After many requests of the Microsoft sales team working on this account, I either could not get a clear cost for these licenses or a variety of different quotes. The 2010 version of SharePoint has tried to address this problem somewhat and has reduced licensing schemes to three. SharePoint 2010 has three levels of functionality, each with a set of corresponding licenses:
>>
Microsoft SharePoint Foundation 2010>>
Microsoft SharePoint Server 2010 plus Standard CAL>>
Microsoft SharePoint Server 2010 plus Enterprise CAL (& Standard CAL)Although SharePoint 2010 is not compatible with SharePoint 2007 (Designer), which is a spe-cialized Web page editor for designing SharePoint sites and end-user workflows for the Server, it does connect well to other Microsoft server applications like Project Management server, OCS 2007, Exchange 2007 and Office 2007.
Although there are hooks in each of these Microsoft applications to help data move from one to the other, it can be tricky to set up and does require very knowledgeable IT or third party involvement (Microsoft Partner).
—David Coleman is not an expert in SharePoint, but he is an expert in collaboration and has been studying and working in this market for over 20 years. He has written four books on the subject and offers a variety of
Webinars, classes, and workshops. If you are having collaboration challenges, visit the Website
www.collaborate.com, phone (650) 342-9197, e-mail [email protected], or visit dcoleman100 on G-mail and Twitter.
Next Issue
Architectural challenges, func-tional challenges, maintenance and training issues
Sharepoint 2010
has three levels
of functionality,
each with a set
of
LAST ISSUE, THE AUTHOR COVERED
WHY AND HOW TO START.
THIS MONTH HE WRAPS UP THIS
TWO-PART SERIES,
BEGINNING WITH ARCHITECTURAL
CHALLENGES.
B Y D AV I D C O L E M A N
SharePoint architecture, which is not inherently collaborative, is based on a much older model of “publish and sub-scribe.” It is very top-down and hierar-chy supportive, more like a Web 1.0 (or pre-Web) application than today’s Web 2.0 social applications. SharePoint is really a Web 1.0 tool more focused on
content than people.
Most organizations use it just for a com-mon document store. What is interesting is that many enterprises are gung-ho about SharePoint for collaboration and buy into Microsoft’s marketing (which I admit is pretty good). However, when we have gone back to these organizations six months or
Elearning! May / June 2011 39
The Challenges of
SharePoint for
Collaboration
more later and talk about SharePoint, there is no discussion of collaboration, but rather all the discussion is on “sites” and the ability to share documents.
SharePoint’s architecture comes from a time of “non-transparency” where securi-ty was more important than sharing. Each site can be its own mini-silo and
can’t see any others (based on topology and access settings); Microsoft recom-mends a “governance framework” to fix this. SharePoint sites are, functionally, ASP.NET 2.0 Web applications that are served using IIS and an SQL server data-base as a data storage back-end. If you are not technical, all this means is that there are lots of I.T. guys behind the curtain making sure things work.
It is also hard to figure out a topology for SharePoint sites, which can be expen-sive to set up and can require a lot of I.T. resources. It is often hard to find docu-ments on “sites” — sometimes even for the people who created those documents. One of the issues with SharePoint is the prolif-eration of sites, many of which are
“aban-doned,” have not been updated, have been deleted or archived. This is more of a poli-cy problem than a technology problem. Additionally, the search functions in SharePoint (MOSS search provides the ability to search metadata attached to doc-uments) are very limited. Microsoft has focused on fixing this in 2010 by adding FAST search technology to make search not only more useful but more granular.
Even so, it is often hard to find specific information in SharePoint unless you are in a site at the top level of the hierarchy; otherwise you can rarely see what is going on in other SharePoint sites. In some client cases, we used a Google search appliance (GSA) to deal with these issues.
This is exactly what Lockheed Martin did
with its “Unity Spaces” project, which took one year to implement, required 40 FTE and $2.5 million. It was built on top of
SharePoint and used ATOM as a publication tool and NetGator as an RSS reader. The company also integrated with S.A.P. employ-ee portals. The estimated total cost to imple-ment Unity Spaces was $8.5 million (which includes integration costs).
NO SOCIAL OR COLLABORATIVE
SharePoint is not really a “social” tool, despite what Microsoft marketing says. It is document management and workflow process tool. Although Microsoft touts SharePoint as the “Swiss Army knife” of collaboration, people can’t share what they can’t find. Wiki, blog, profiles and other social functions were very minimal in 2007, somewhat better in the 2010 version. If they actually worked well, there would be no market for third-party developers like:
>>
Atlassian Confluence>>
Social Text>>
Jive (Clearspace)>>
Connectbeam>>
Mindtouch>>
Telligent (build on top of SharePoint)>>
NewsGator Social Sites (built on top of SharePoint)Although 2010 is the current version of SharePoint, most I.T. organizations have not yet migrated to the new version.
sharepoint
for
collaboration
I.T is an appropriate resource for ERP
applications, but the wrong resource for
'situa-tional applications'; that is, applications you need
right away for specific purposes that may be used
for a short time or specific situation.
– David Coleman
In 2008, after SharePoint 2007 was released, Forrester predicted that SharePoint would “steamroll” the Enterprise 2.0 market despite “taking heat from some observers about SharePoint’s wiki, blog and social net-working functionality.” Some of these chal-lenges have been addressed in SharePoint 2010. However, I expect as Microsoft fills in the holes, these more agile third-party ven-dors will start to incorporate new functions that will take Microsoft years to respond to.
FUNCTIONAL CHALLENGES
SharePoint has quite a range of functional-ity. Yet here are some common functional issues:
>>
When you save a file back toSharePoint from your desktop, it does not delete the old version, which can cause confusion and a proliferation of documents.
>>
Write directly on a wiki (edit and save): easy to compare old and new versions. Microsoft wiki template is very limited in these abilities and not strong in many others.>>
If you choose to “deactivate” a site, you lose all the customization infor-mation in that site.>>
Can only add “list” templates to “list-based” sites.>>
Can only add a picture from a Web address; can’t browse your desktop to do it.>>
Often difficult to trace a path back to the document.MAINTENANCE, TRAINING ISSUES
Even if SharePoint is free through Microsoft’s Enterprise license, a lot of cost is still involved:
>>
Most I.T. shops have to send represen-tatives out for SharePoint training or bring consultants in. Figure one con-sultant for 160 hours at $175/hr. to install and document. Figure one trainer $6,000 per week for every 50 students.>>
Not an easy platform to develop appli-cations for; its development cycle is 50 percent longer than most other options.>>
50 percent of users find that the devel-opment of custom solutions require more effort than expected (AIIM report, 2008).>>
TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) is com-posed of licensing cost plus develop-ment cost plus managedevelop-ment cost plus support cost. SharePoint 2010 is only offered as 64-bit server and requires all new 64-bit servers to support it (64-bit Windows Server 2008 or 64-bit Windows Server 2008 R2). It also will require bit SQL Server 2008 or 64-bit SQL Server 2005 — a rip-and-replace exercise if you don’t already have these servers for the 2010 version.>>
SharePoint uses Web parts (like widg-ets) for customization. A number of third-party Microsoft partners build templates and widgets. Microsoft does defray some of the partner support costs through the SPDS program.THE GOOD AND THE BAD
SharePoint 2010 is relatively new, and
many companies are looking at upgrading their 2007 servers because Microsoft offers the upgrade free as part of its enterprise license. However, free is never free. The initial cost for the software often is the least expensive part of TCO.
There have been a lot of improvements in SharePoint 2010 as well as the Microsoft marketing propaganda. This version seems to be focused a bit more on the Web, or work outside the firewall than 2007 (which was mostly Intranet focused). FAST search
functionality is now included. Although SharePoint 2010 claims it is able to create communities for large enterprises, many enterprises choose Jive or other more community-oriented tools.
Most enterprises today are more exter-nally than interexter-nally focused. With cloud-based collaborative services (CBCS), there is no longer the need for
Elearning! May / June 2011 41
“Because of the attractive pricing and
the current economic climate, five state
governments have migrated from
SharePoint to Premier Apps."
expensive server-based solutions like what Microsoft and IBM/Lotus offer. Google is getting good traction with its Premiere Apps and enterprise services. At $50/pp/year with little set-up (does not require an I.T. guy), storage, back-up, etc. are all taken care of by Google. Premiere Apps have been adding new features (for no extra cost) by buying technologies from smaller companies. Because of the attractive pricing and the current economic climate, five state gov-ernments have migrated from
SharePoint over to Premiere Apps. Although Microsoft partners do offer SharePoint as a cloud service, they are not seeing the same traction as Google.
Is the business or the I.T. department making decisions about the business’s technology needs. Without any bad inten-tions, most I.T. departments take the path of least resistance (in this case
SharePoint). The smart ones look at adop-tion and usage six months later. What often is easiest for I.T. is not the best for the business. But because the collaborative solution I.T. chooses does perform some
of the functions needed by the business, the enterprise will often adopt SharePoint because it has I.T.’s blessing.
These days, I.T. is an appropriate resource for ERP applications, but absolutely the wrong resource for what I call “situational applications” — that is, applications you need right away for spe-cific purposes and that may be used for only a short time or a specific situation. Many of today’s 2000-plus collaboration tools fall into this category, and many of them are free to try and inexpensive to subscribe to. This moves collaboration from a line item in a budget to a monthly expense. So many groups, departments and teams in the enterprise are finding their own collaborative solutions that fit their needs rather than following the choice of I.T.
SharePoint still only runs on Windows, and it was not originally built as a collabo-ration tool, but Microsoft keeps bolting on collaborative functions and calling it a col-laborative tool. As I said, the marketing is pretty convincing — but you make your own decision.
—David Coleman is an expert in collabora-tion and has been studying and working in this market for over 20 years. He has written four books and offers a variety of Webinars, classes and workshops. If you are having col-laboration challenges, visit the Website www.collaborate.com, phone (650) 342-9197, e-mail [email protected], or visit dcole-man100 on G-mail and Twitter.
