Content Management Systems – May They Rest in Peace
“An estimated 75 percent of today’s content management solutions were installed before the year 2010 – meaning that most organizations are now depending upon systems that at best are dated, and at worst dangerously close to end-of-life.” Source: Holly Group.
I don’t think I would use the term ‘digital transformation’ but rather ‘digital divide’ here. Where are all these companies that are dropping millions on artificial intelligence, and can’t replace systems that are now antiquated? At one time, they represented state of the art software systems, and were capable of many miraculous feats, but now are just masters of the mundane. Of course, we still run into organizations with SharePoint 2007 – you kind of want to go out and buy them a whole new setup, you feel so sorry for them.
Last year I had to do quite a bit of research on content management systems. It was a whole new world. What I don’t get is that supposedly 65 percent of content management systems fail. The rule of thumb is to double the vendor quote, yet organizations presumably just keep buying systems. Look at the numbers!
- 70 percent have two or more enterprise content management systems
- 29 percent are using four or more
- 22 percent have five or more
- 38 percent have more than five enterprise, document, or records management systems
- Over 50 percent involve a migration from a previous enterprise content management system
There is disruption in the marketplace, but it doesn’t seem to be pushing these elephants out of the room. 62 percent of end users can’t find anything, 52 percent are duplicating efforts, 46 percent feel there is no information reuse, and 52 percent are still wed to their file shares.
Cloud ready software is changing the game plan. Upstarts such as file sync-and-share and the big players so totally misreading the marketplace have ‘sort of’ made for a more competitive playing field, but not by much.
There is too much content now not to manage it. What are we looking for? I like, “A repeatable system that governs the management of content throughout its lifecycle.” That pretty much covers it. Some vendors even tout classification. Come on. We are a classification vendor. And no, I have not in my research come across any content management software that truly classifies content beyond keywords, proximity, or entity extraction – some are now calling their technology natural language processing. That is going straight to nowhere.
Do we even need full-blown, hard-to-use, and complicated legacy systems? I vote No. Maybe Gartner got it right when it renamed enterprise content management ‘content services.’ Buy what you need, where it makes sense. I would venture to say that classification is a given. But not classification as it’s currently sold.
Our software can generate multi-term metadata – think phrases, concepts, and subjects – means no end user tagging, and classifies in real time or in batch mode. The classification is easy to both define and use, and employs taxonomies where modifications are eventually ruled by humans.
Now we will prompt you and ask if you have thought in these terms, but its’ only helpful prodding. Oh, and workflows to automate processing of records, privacy content, and all those gotchas that are so prevalent today. Need that same metadata for records management, identification of privacy and sensitive content, secure collaboration, or text analytics? Be my guest. It’s on the house.