tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19648043.post113770065782212831..comments2023-10-15T12:59:03.688+01:00Comments on doingITbetter: Records Management 2006 - Part 3alan pelz-sharpehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05296176174147804320noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19648043.post-85867616239266669522007-01-01T21:49:00.000+00:002007-01-01T21:49:00.000+00:00The issue with RM is that vendors have pushed RM a...The issue with RM is that vendors have pushed RM as a tool where a successful RM requires it to be a part of business process. Where IT would love to have a tool, business would like to solve the business needs. RM as a tool has not only comes with huge implementation challenges but does not address the on going ownership and accountability issues. RM should be part of a process rather than a stand alone task for the people of the organization. As we see more business process related initiative in the organizations, RM functionality will be slowly wrapped in the process steps. This we will find more RM functionality being addressed by BPM vendors - independent of tools which actually applies retention and disposal to the content. So business which has RM implementations, would slowly align with the business processes.The Bloggerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02644213316382992097noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19648043.post-1137883942663343972006-01-21T22:52:00.000+00:002006-01-21T22:52:00.000+00:00I think an RM reference architecture would be a go...I think an RM reference architecture would be a good thing. But at the end of the day I think its about being realistic as to what you can effectively manage and what you cannot. So a reference architecture around retention for example would be a very good starting point.<BR/><BR/>Why haven't they done it, good question - I guess because most vendors who matter (the really big ones), have only recently grasped the sheer complexity of managing of unstructured data) - the specialists , RM-DM-ECM etc, don't have the market clout to do so, and their past efforts DMA/WFMC at common standards have fallen well short.<BR/><BR/>Good point though, and something worth thinking through further.<BR/><BR/>Alanalan pelz-sharpehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05296176174147804320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19648043.post-1137874088776427902006-01-21T20:08:00.000+00:002006-01-21T20:08:00.000+00:00If enterprises don't even understand the basics of...If enterprises don't even understand the basics of records management, could this be solved by having all the vendors in this space develop a publicly available RM Reference Architecture?<BR/><BR/>Why haven't the vendors already started creating one...James McGovernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10192703428650911093noreply@blogger.com