<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Approaches to EDRMS in local government</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thinkingrecords.co.uk/2009/03/29/edrms-approaches-in-localgovernment/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thinkingrecords.co.uk/2009/03/29/edrms-approaches-in-localgovernment/</link>
	<description>James Lappin's records management blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2011 02:46:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Lappin</title>
		<link>http://thinkingrecords.co.uk/2009/03/29/edrms-approaches-in-localgovernment/#comment-675</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[James Lappin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Jul 2011 10:45:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thinkingrecords.wordpress.com/?p=3#comment-675</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Jason,  the early adopters of SharePoint 2010 have tended to be organisations that didn&#039;t have an existing  SharePoint 2007 implementation.  Organisations that had a SharePoint 2007 implementations have not rushed to upgrade to SharePoint 2010 (because of the need for all the testing/buying new hardware/scheduling downtime etc).  This means the organisations with the most experience of SharePoint (and most capable of adapting it for records management) have not yet started using SharePoint 2010. The first service pack has just been issued for SharePoint 2010 so I suspect we will see most of the SharePoint 2007 implementations upgrade over the next 6 to 12 months.   There may be some good case studies of records management in SharePoint 2010 out there, but I haven&#039;t heard of any.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Jason,  the early adopters of SharePoint 2010 have tended to be organisations that didn&#8217;t have an existing  SharePoint 2007 implementation.  Organisations that had a SharePoint 2007 implementations have not rushed to upgrade to SharePoint 2010 (because of the need for all the testing/buying new hardware/scheduling downtime etc).  This means the organisations with the most experience of SharePoint (and most capable of adapting it for records management) have not yet started using SharePoint 2010. The first service pack has just been issued for SharePoint 2010 so I suspect we will see most of the SharePoint 2007 implementations upgrade over the next 6 to 12 months.   There may be some good case studies of records management in SharePoint 2010 out there, but I haven&#8217;t heard of any.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Linehan</title>
		<link>http://thinkingrecords.co.uk/2009/03/29/edrms-approaches-in-localgovernment/#comment-672</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jason Linehan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Jul 2011 15:36:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thinkingrecords.wordpress.com/?p=3#comment-672</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[James / anyone:
Does anyone know if the hen has grown any teeth yet? We at Ceredigion County Council 
are very interested to know if anyone has implemented MOSS 2010 for RM yet...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>James / anyone:<br />
Does anyone know if the hen has grown any teeth yet? We at Ceredigion County Council<br />
are very interested to know if anyone has implemented MOSS 2010 for RM yet&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Lappin</title>
		<link>http://thinkingrecords.co.uk/2009/03/29/edrms-approaches-in-localgovernment/#comment-12</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[James Lappin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 May 2009 20:19:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thinkingrecords.wordpress.com/?p=3#comment-12</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Chris

Its good to hear that your colleagues like using their SharePoint facility. You are in a very interesting situation having both EDRMS and SharePoint users in the your organisation.  Do you notice much of a difference in user feedack from those using EDRM and those using SharePoint?

Microsoft seems in many organisations to be bundling up SharePoint with negotiations over Office and Windows upgrades.  I won&#039;t pretend I am comfortable with that.  However once an organisation, for whatever reason, has decided to purchase and implement SharePoint then the best thing we can do is to help the organisation take advantage of SharePoint&#039;s strengths and mitigate its weaknesses.


And that means working to get SharePoint simple enough for teams to make sense of and work with, but rich enough for them to derive benefit from it.   It also means working to get  procedures set tight enough for SharePoint to be governable but flexible enough for colleagues to be able to innovate and be creative with it.  

Your point about us being caught like rabbits in the headlights in front of the rise of SharePoint is true.  I think as a profession we have now reached the point where we can articulate the weaknesses of SharePoint from a records management point of view, but we need to move on from that to generate and share best practices on managing documents and records in SharePoint, with and without EDRMS.  

We really could do with some decent case studies of succesful  records management approaches to SharePoint:  but they seem as rare as hens teeth at the moment:  I didn&#039;t hear of any at the recent RMS conference.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Chris</p>
<p>Its good to hear that your colleagues like using their SharePoint facility. You are in a very interesting situation having both EDRMS and SharePoint users in the your organisation.  Do you notice much of a difference in user feedack from those using EDRM and those using SharePoint?</p>
<p>Microsoft seems in many organisations to be bundling up SharePoint with negotiations over Office and Windows upgrades.  I won&#8217;t pretend I am comfortable with that.  However once an organisation, for whatever reason, has decided to purchase and implement SharePoint then the best thing we can do is to help the organisation take advantage of SharePoint&#8217;s strengths and mitigate its weaknesses.</p>
<p>And that means working to get SharePoint simple enough for teams to make sense of and work with, but rich enough for them to derive benefit from it.   It also means working to get  procedures set tight enough for SharePoint to be governable but flexible enough for colleagues to be able to innovate and be creative with it.  </p>
<p>Your point about us being caught like rabbits in the headlights in front of the rise of SharePoint is true.  I think as a profession we have now reached the point where we can articulate the weaknesses of SharePoint from a records management point of view, but we need to move on from that to generate and share best practices on managing documents and records in SharePoint, with and without EDRMS.  </p>
<p>We really could do with some decent case studies of succesful  records management approaches to SharePoint:  but they seem as rare as hens teeth at the moment:  I didn&#8217;t hear of any at the recent RMS conference.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Tinsley</title>
		<link>http://thinkingrecords.co.uk/2009/03/29/edrms-approaches-in-localgovernment/#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chris Tinsley]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 11:43:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thinkingrecords.wordpress.com/?p=3#comment-9</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[James does not do himself full credit, his very well laid out critism of SharePoint as an EDRM product and as a Web 2.0 product left us all with very little room to argue. Most of the &quot;debate&quot; seemed to be about SharePoint&#039;s degree of badness. I quite like the look and feel of SharePoint and so do my users, it allows them to retain some of the control and customisation that many EDRM systems do not allow. That of course doesn&#039;t make it a good EDRM system.

Many of the delegates at the South West RMS are struggling to move forward and control their information. As James rightly points out a fileplan to cover a Local Authority is massive and possibly unworkable in the long term. You would never build a business that looks like a Local Authority. How I would love to work for a simple, single purpose Government Department. 

I like to think of our meeting as therapy sessions for the under funded. What seems to be clear is that many IT departments are pushing SharePoint on to people who don&#039;t want it as part of their Microsoft Enterprise agreement.

We the user meanwhile stnd staring in to the headlights like a tartled rabbit, waiting for a viable solution to hit us between the eyes.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>James does not do himself full credit, his very well laid out critism of SharePoint as an EDRM product and as a Web 2.0 product left us all with very little room to argue. Most of the &#8220;debate&#8221; seemed to be about SharePoint&#8217;s degree of badness. I quite like the look and feel of SharePoint and so do my users, it allows them to retain some of the control and customisation that many EDRM systems do not allow. That of course doesn&#8217;t make it a good EDRM system.</p>
<p>Many of the delegates at the South West RMS are struggling to move forward and control their information. As James rightly points out a fileplan to cover a Local Authority is massive and possibly unworkable in the long term. You would never build a business that looks like a Local Authority. How I would love to work for a simple, single purpose Government Department. </p>
<p>I like to think of our meeting as therapy sessions for the under funded. What seems to be clear is that many IT departments are pushing SharePoint on to people who don&#8217;t want it as part of their Microsoft Enterprise agreement.</p>
<p>We the user meanwhile stnd staring in to the headlights like a tartled rabbit, waiting for a viable solution to hit us between the eyes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

