It has been weeks since I blogged, or even Tweeted on a regular basis. Where have I been?  Dan and I are on the road, consulting on a very complex, grand and most interesting ECM project.  A Fortune 100 company that remains successful and growing in spite of the economy, has managed to achieve such greatness without benefit of a formal Information Architecture and ECM strategy. This project has been the focus of our time and attention of late.  The challenge is great and the potential opportunity huge.

We are dealing with a large and diverse collection of content in various stages of maturity, quality,  accuracy and accessibility. The organization readily realizes that years of ad hoc, manual and individual approaches to content management have resulted in a nearly chaotic collection of content and processes. Many issues exist, from a need for enterprise search and a centralized taxonomy, to strategies for content distribution. But a fundamental issue is the state of the collection of content itself.

Among the many repositories, valuable content resides amongst  dated, ambiguous, unapproved and at times contradictory content. A critical decision has been made to clean up the content repositories before addressing findability. The merit of beginning with the establishment of search and taxonomy, under a series of UIs, and using these to expedite the discovery of dated and inaccurate content and subsequently deleting it was debated, but a fundamental decision was made not to expose users to the “garbage”, but rather, first authenticate and clean up the content and subsequently use the findability tools to expose an “official body of quality content.”

But I am not blogging today simply to relay this experience.  While deep in thought about this situation, I heard a news story that brought this decision point to mind, and ignited in me a chance to blog about the BP oil “spill”.  (Hey its not a spill -  it’s an underwater gusher. Let’s call it what it is.)

Despite many strong opinions about this disaster, I have refrained from blogging about it because the charter of my blog is ECM.  Last week’s news, however, gave me my excuse to express opinion about this disaster, ala ECM.  BP is using a form of ECM and Web 2.0 to control public opinion. They have hired “reporters” to write about the “spill” from a “more positive” perspective. These “reporters” are using phrases to describe their experience watching the clean up effort such as: “…enjoyed the spectacular ballet at sea… dolphins swimming around us. Even a shark came along to watch the show.” (Watch the show? Try struggle to survive, in disgust?  And what’s with “ballet?”).  They have also reported that “… hotels have been prospering because so many people have come here from BP and other oil emergency response teams.”  According to other independent, i.e non-BP owned sources, this is simply not true and the local tourist trade is seriously hurting.

I keep my outrage and disgust about this entire situation in check – the point I want to raise here is this, if left unchecked and un-managed,  garbage such as this could potentially be retrieved as “fact.”  Content authentication and source identification are critical to a comprehensive ECM strategy.

Internet and intranet sites alike have the potential to provide access to a wealth of content, but can contain “garbage” among the “jewels”,  garbage as rank and lethal as the oil “spill” itself. (OK I snuck that in.)

Consumers of content need to be diligent in filtering garbage from “fact”, or be assured, as is the case with our client going forward, that systems are in place to control publication.  I am not advocating censorship, but ECM systems need to provide some approach to quality control, tailored to the scope and needs of individual situations. Fact checking,  authority and credentials of authors, and/or providing clear and blatant identification of authorship are all steps that can be taken to at least let the reader decide what is content and what is “garbage”.

In an earlier blog post, I directly addressed the need to authenticate content – of all types. As an issue  fundamentally critical to any and all collections of content – especially those that are “findable.”

In another earlier post I commented on the irony of bloggers who were “unhappy” with a regulation that compelled them to disclose any affiliations or gifts they  received in connection with their blog writing.

I have to say that at least in the case of BP, authors are identified as “BP Reporters”. So at least the potential is there for the reader to use a garbage filter on the consumption of content. – In the absence of content quality controls, such as those being implemented by my client, readers must beware.

Two  weeks ago I spoke on a webinar hosted by SpringCM.  My presentation focused on how to take a structured and methodical approach to defining and executing an ECM strategy. You can download the slides I used slides below, and/or if you prefer listen to the recorded webinar here.

As is always is the case when I speak on a webinar , I intended to provide repsonses to all unanswered questions posed by the audience, here in my blog.  Well, history was made two weeks ago. For the first time, all questions were answered during the one hour time slot. (You can listen to the webinar complete with Q and A here.)

So, this follow-up blog post focuses exclusively on the results of the quick polls we took of the approximately 200 attendees during the webinar.

It is interesting to note, right from the start, that  nearly half (47%) of the audience members worked in organizations that had an ECM strategy.

Why is this interesting? For a few reasons. First, it indicates that the ECM market still has lots of legs, and that the need to build a deliberate strategy for leveraging the capabilities of ECM still exists in many organizations . In fact, the fact that the 47% that have a strategy nonetheless attended this webinar indicates, IMHO, that a need to maintain that strategy and weigh new options is a important to many organizations. Again, IMHO, this is a best practice, to keep the ECM strategy green by continuously updating it in order to take advantage of lessons learned and emerging new technologies and techniques (among these today SharePoint and Cloud Computing.)

The value of having an ECM strategy is reflected in the percentage of organizations that have or  plan to have document-based applications between themselves and customers and partners.

I believe it is no coincidence that 48% of the webinar audience indicated that they planned on having document-based applications with their customers and partners. This is likely the same group (note the 1% difference in groups)  that indicated that they had an existing ECM strategy.  An organization might be able to cobble by with a lackadaiscal approach to managing its business content, but when that content is integrated into serious business applications, especially those that involve outside parties, a defined strategy for managing the content is essential.

As mentioned above, SharePoint represents a new offering in the ECM strategy equation. It is clearly a technology that has garnered much attention. So, we asked those webinar attendees that indicated that they had an ECM strategy, if SharePoint was a component of that strategy. The results were a bit surprising. Only 57% indicated that it was.

I say the results are surprising because most other market data concerning the take-up of SharePoint, including our own earlier research, typically positions the presence of SharePoint in organizations a bit higher. (In our own study it was 65% and 23% more planning on it.)  What I believe the results of this poll may indicate is that SharePoint  is still predominately  used as an ad hoc approach to file sharing and simple collaboration, and thus for some, is not positioned as part of an official ECM strategy.  Positioning Sharepoint as part of a corporate ECM strategy requires significant further investment in time, money and effort – involving integration with complementary functionality including process management (e.g. BPM and workflow). This was a topic discussed in more detail on our last webinar.

Given that the webinar included advice on extending ECM into the Cloud, we asked the audience members if their organization had deployed any applications in the Cloud. Not surprisingly, a small majority, 56%, indicated no. Past market research I have conducted on this point has yielded similar findings.

Despite the success of SaaS-based applications, such as SalesForce.com, for example, many organizations have yet to fully embrace the Cloud. I believe this will likely change in the next year, based on my unofficial tracking of market activity (e.g. related webinars, trade-show presentations, traditional press coverage and Twitter activity.)  In fact this observation prompted me to tweet yesterday “Is it me, or is Cloud Computing the new SharePoint? Is seems to be everywhere.”  The comment sparked a fair amount of Twitter activity and a discussion thread on LinkedIn.

Lastly, we asked about application priorities in the upcoming 18 months. Respondents were given 9 candidate applications to select from. For the most part, responses indicated that a wide variety of business applications are being targeted. The most popularly selected (by40%) application was project collaboration.

Herein lies the value proposition for having an ECM strategy. By establishing an ECM platform (whether a single product, or conglomeration of products orchestrated as a single platform in which best of breed approaches and functions work seamlessly together), organizations can deploy any number of targeted and specific business applications on top of the platform. Even in cases where a turnkey vertical/horizontal application is deployed, it often makes good sense to deploy such an application built on the underlying enterprise platform, to minimize further customization and integration.  This point was further discussed in the last webinar.

So on that note, I’ll remind you that if you missed the first webinar in this series, focused on ECM, SharePoint and  Cloud Computing specifically, you may want to read that follow-up blog . It contains links to the slides and recorded session, as well as many definitions – including – what is ECM.

On February 23, 2010, I was a featured speaker on the SpringCM webinar entitled “Making SharePoint Work.”  The slides from the presentation can be found here.

Additionally you can listen to the archive of the webinar.

In the webinar, I reference a survey and study I conducted on SharePoint user experiences.  You can access that paper here.

There were many questions asked and some answered during the webinar.  As has always been my policy, I will answer all outstanding questions, in this case, in this blog post, save for those posed to my co-presenter,  Jeff Piper of SpringCM.  Jeff has posted his answers separately.

So without further ado, here goes:

Q: What is ECM?

A:   I find this question eye-opening because all too often, those of us in the industry forget that terms and acronyms we use on a daily basis have not yet been fully absorbed into the general business lexicon.  ECM stands for, at least in the way I use it,  Enterprise Content Management. There is no standard definition for it, but it is an acronym and phrse that I am very opinionated about. Rather than state my definition here, I refer you to another recent post, in which I define ECM.

Q:How can SharePoint and/or SpringCM be used for project management?

A: I find this question somewhat confusing, and hope that my answer addresses it properly. Neither SharePoint nor SpringCM (or any ECM product for that matter) provides project management per se. There are methodologies, practices and programs that specifically address project management. Indeed, these could be used to manage the roll out of an ECM and/or SharePoint implementation. Functionality in either product (e.g., collaboration and wikis) could be used to augment project management. Functionality in SpringCM (e.g., workflow) could be used to manage specific processes.  But again, neither provides a full-fledged project management system.

Q: Does MS SP 2010 provide new or added functions for integration to third party applications via .Net?

A:  Microsoft has added much to the integration capabilities of SharePoint in 2010. Programmer interfaces exist for not only .Net, but also REST, XML, and JavaScript.  In addition to enhanced APIs, there is better integration support in Visual Studio 2010, Visio, and SharePoint Designer 2010.The list of improvements made in this regard is extensive, and I will not try to list them all here. You should refer to the Microsoft site for more details.

Q:  How can SharePoint work in a cloud environment?

A:  This question is not as simple as it may seem. First – Microsoft provides 2 SaaS (Software as a Service) versions of SharePoint.  So there are 2 ways to access Sharepoint in the Cloud (Saas).  But it must be appreciated that these are limited siloed deployments. The access to SharePoint in these cases is “in the cloud”, but the focus of the webinar was how to EXTEND SharePoint into the Cloud, not how to simply access it that way. Extending SharePoint via the Cloud refers  to making SharePoint an integral part of cloud-based business applications. In order to do that you either have to undertake a rigorous amount of customized development, or leverage the connectivity of SharePoint into a Cloud-based application – such as SpringCM for ECM, workflow and other related applications.

Q:  Is it best to utilize SharePoint as your ECM or use it as a portal that is integrated with other Document/Records Management solutions that have all the existing features such as image capture?

A: The essence to the answer was a major theme of the webinar. While the webinar focused on leveraging the Cloud to extend the reach and capabilities of SharePoint, it started by  making the case that few organizations use SharePoint as an ECM solution.  It is part of a solution. Based on market trends, SharePoint is best used as an internal website for simple document management,  file sharing and simple collaboration.  Based on the definition of ECM provided above, it should become apparent that SharePoint should not be positioned as the ECM solution or even platform, it is a component.   (See the next two questions and answers for additional examples of how/why SharePoint would not be positioned as the ECM solution.)

Q:  What are the Records Management capabilities of MOSS 2007 vs MOSS 2010?

A: SharePoint users ranked the records management capabilities of SharePoint very low in the survey I conducted. Overall market opinion is  that records management is not a core strength of SharePoint.  I am aware of more than one system integrator that make a good business integrating records management into SharePoint.  While SharePoint does provide some records management capability , the Microsoft product development blog site itself states that the records capability is “not intended” for customers with serious/confidential records needs. Little has changed in this regard between 2007 and 2010.

Q:  Has anyone added  MOSS 2007 Records Management Application to SP?

A: (See the response to the preceding question.) Additionally, yes, I am aware of  organizations that have integrated records management products/functionality into their SharePoint environment, and know of  several system integrators that make a fair living from doing this. I suspect the genesis of your question stems from the fact that MOSS 2007 lacks “serious” and simple to deploy records management capabilities.

Q:  Can you give me some more examples of what complex applications are?

A:  Let me put this question into context, for those who were not part of our live audience. A major theme of the webinar was the need to extend SharePoint with complementary tools and functionality in order to support complex business applications. This was specifically stressed in this webinar because a strength of SpringCM is workflow and BPM functionality, functionality required in order to automate complex business applications. But, the audience wanted to know what is meant by the phrase “complex application.”   This is somewhat of a subjective question –  complexity is in the eye of the beholder. That said, complex applications typically involve intricate multi-step and multi-participant workflows. They often encompass multiple sub-processes, and several decision points. They often require access/integration between several content resources and applications.  Some examples include: contract management, case management, claims management (e.g. processing an insurance claim), event planning, on-boarding new customers and employees, product lifecycle management, loan applications, SOP (standard operating procedures) development and management, and new drug submissions.

Q: You talked about scaling.  Did you mean development or performance scaling issues?

A:  Both.  Development scalability relates to the issues  addressed in the webinar around tools, skills, and complexity in delivering business process and document management applications.  Performance scalability is something that cloud can address by accessing a shared resource optimized for Enterprise Content Management, but perhaps more importantly by eliminating the complexity of operating and managing all the hardware and software components necessary in, for example, a customer-facing case management application, where crossing the firewall creates all kinds of challenges in native SharePoint.

Q: ­We are just getting ready to install MOSS 2007 at our company.   What areas of SharePoint are noticeably strengthened in versions 2007 and 2010?

A:  Wow – loaded question. Improvements made in SharePoint 2007. I will not attempt to answer that here. SharePoint 2007  is now 3 years old. I do not succinctly recall what was added in 2007, but do recall that it was this release that turned the general market perception about SharePoint around. This was the first release of SharePoint in which organizations began discussing real application development. But there still lacked much functionality.  Some of that is addressed in 2010.Enhancements include: improved user interfaces (especially concerning content creation), tighter integration with MS Office, better integration capabilities (see discussion above regarding .Net), enhanced support for virtually all web browsers, much improved and centralized administration capabilities, enhanced navigation and search through increased support for meta data (i.e., tag clouds, formal taxonomies, user-created folksonomies,  bookmarks), support of  “in-place records,” (i.e., locked official files),and inclusion of three different types of search (including integration with FAST search, which Microsoft acquired a few years back – cost of this functionality still not released). It should be understood that the statements made here are speculation as SharePoint 2010 has not been released yet.

And now for the final question:

Q:  Our gov’t agency deployed SharePoint 4 years ago without a formal deployment plan, project management plan, or governance. Now, SharePoint is unwieldy…no guidance on site design, permissions are not managed.  How do we get back control and add some management?­

A: This question reminds me of the old joke “A tourist in New York stops a man on the street and asks ‘How do I get to Carnegie Hall?’, and the man answers “Practice, practice practice’.”   Unfortunately there is no easy answer to your question. You need to undergo a full-scale ECM strategy development project.  This will include an inventory of all the current SharePoint sites.  There are two pieces of good news I can provide however:  1.  Misery loves company – you are not alone. Many organizations have released SharePoint without a strategy and suddenly find themselves in a runaway uncontrolled environment.  In fact that was one of the findings in teh SharePoint research I conducted. A significant portion of user organizations did not know  the number of SharePoint sites or volume of content housed within SharePoint inside the organization.   2. SpringCM will be hosting another webinar on April 13, with me as a guest speaker, this time focusing on how to conduct a needs assessment and build an ECM strategy.  Register now,

Collaboration – it’s all the rage, and to some it is “new.”

Yet for any project, whether it is assembling a sales proposal in response to a Request For Proposals (RFP), to the collaboration and coordination necessary to build an aircraft carrier, or any size or style of collaboration in between, there are several questions to consider when it comes to modern day collaboration, what many are calling Enterprise 2.0, or for those with a longer history in business collaboration, Knowledge Management 2.0.

Do you believe that your organization has pulled together a suitably versatile and agile collaboration toolkit?

Are your collaboration tools built for distributed teams, or for localized teams?

Are the tools involved well-integrated into the flow of collaborative work (search, research, document, refine, revise, publish, re-use, etc.), or do you as a user of the toolkit have to remember what tool or application to use at various stages within the context of collaboration?

While management may say that “we need more collaboration,” are you measured based on collaborative contributions, or in the end are you actually penalized for team contributions if it gets in the way of your individual work and personal performance measures?

Join us for a discussion (continue discussion in comments below or twitter via #iaie20) on the current and future state of collaboration – and what it takes to ensure that your culture, skills, and technical tools are up to the task of real-time, flexible online collaboration. Not all collaboration efforts or outcomes are the same – make sure you are setting yourself up to succeed.

Watch the Video archive of Webinar

Is your Information Architected for Collaboration? for Innovation? to leverage the strengths of the workers and teams within the organization?

Contact us now at 
617-933-9655 to discuss our Collaboration-focused assessments, consulting or workshops, and to schedule a private 30-minute executive briefing on how we can most effectively work together. You can quickly jump-start or re-start your collaboration efforts, and we can show you how.

Schedule a private executive briefing now

Target your collaboration pains now, details on our consulting practices related to Collaboration and Innovation can be found at:

• Collaboration and Enterprise 2.0 Workshops, Coaching and Consulting
• Innovation Management Workshops and Coaching/Consulting

OK, I admit it. I do not spend all my weekends sitting around thinking deep ECM and KM thoughts. I enjoy hanging out with the kids and indulging in some mindless TV watching.  Its amazing though how the KM/ECM geek in me will sometimes connect the two – mindless TV and ECM/KM that is.

Last night I was wrapping up the weekend watching The Simpsons with my 2 daughters. Sure, occasionally there is a poignant message or two – usually lost on the kids. But in last nights episode there was a strong and important message directed right to every KM, ECM and E2.0 manager. Intentional or not – it was there and you did not have to think to deeply to catch it.

The Simpsons find themselves in Machu Pichu (don’t ask why – its not worth it). The narrator is explaining the significance of the site and states something along the lines of “This great civilization built a great wall around its people to protect it from the outside and keep their culture pure. But great walls also lock out knowledge, (Seriously that is the word he used.) and as a result the Incas were not adept at understanding the rest of the world or dealing with change. When the conquistadors appeared they were confused, ran and were destroyed.”

OK – you all got it right? “But great walls also lock out knowledge.” (Yes, the historical accuracy is off here – but the tie to ECM, KM and E2.0 – nonetheless poignant and worth reiterating.) “But great walls also lock out knowledge.” I spared my kids the thought that popped into my mind, “EXACTLY and that is the mission of every KM, ECM and Enterprise 2.0 manager”, to manage the BALANCE between security and collaboration. It is a topic I have spoken, written and blogged about many times. IAI published a primer on this very subject. I am currently in the process of working with Susan Scrupski, and members of The 2.0 Adoption Council on this very issue.

A group of the Council members who had to deal with strict privacy laws in Europe could have taken the “Machu Pichu” approach and erred on the side of security. But in the interest of collaboration to support agility and innovation, they worked a bit harder and used techniques and technologies to strike a clever balance between security and collaboration.  Sure – some of us may look at such approaches and say “D’oh”, or even “Duh”, but far too many have yet to really embrace this balancing act as the primary focus of long term success in the world of Knowledge Management, ECM and E2.0.

If you haven’t, I again invite you to read the primer on Content Security, and the 2.0 Adoption Council report when it is available next month.

An article in today’s Boston Globe, reports that a new regulation will compel bloggers to disclose any affiliations or gifts they have received.

As Web 2.0 matures, it will be more regulated. This is an issue I have blogged and spoken about many times before.  But what makes this article even more interesting to me is the reaction of bloggers. In this case the regulation actually seeks to make blogs more transparent – exposing any and all connections between the author and another possibly conflicting interest. The article states “Beginning today, bloggers, Twitterers, and others who write online reviews or endorse products … must disclose it when they receive free merchandise or payment for writing about an item.” Ah – disclosure – full transparency.  This is a good thing – right?

Web 2.0 zealots have long pontificated that the 2.0 movement is grounded in transparency and openness. And yet, in this instance they are “unhappy” with a ruling that makes their sites even more transparent. Oh the irony.

As previously stated, I have many times before blogged about the need for responsible use of Web and Enterprise 2.0 technologies, including the strategic leveraging of security, control and yes full-disclosure.  As Web 2.0 matures, perhaps many of its zealots will have to mature as well and realize that in many cases their  writings are not random ramblings but real business content, which needs to be responsibly managed and  accurately positioned for what it really is.

The article is really worth a read. The commentary and arguments from bloggers are telling and at times almost amusing.

Arguably there is no important time than NOW to ensure that your organization has an innovation strategy.

After all, without a strategy, how are you going to making the changes to your business that you need to make, in order to survive the economic storm, and (if you move quickly and intelligently) to be well positioned to blow past your competition as the economy improves?

But strategy isn’t enough…

Yes, companies need an innovation strategy – and ideally, that innovation strategy is no different from the business strategy at large.

As very smart, and quite wealthy friend of mine once said in doing the upkeep on his home – “if you aren’t fixing it up, it’s breaking down.” And that most certainly applies to businesses and business models as well as it does to homes.

So, innovation strategy should either be your business strategy, or a sub-set of the overall organizational strategy, but strategy, even very deep, extremely well planned strategy will not do a SINGLE thing to move your company forward.

Execution is what counts – the rest is theory

There is an IBM commercial from the early 2000s that I frequently reference, that goes something like this:

A business managers has a room full of his team, and he’s proudly showing off the 3-inch thick paper binder with the “strategy that took us 12 months and 3 million dollars to create. It’s the most cutting-edge strategy we’ve ever had, and we’re extremely excited by this. My question to all of you is… can we do it?”

(dead silence for 10 seconds)

No! Absolutely not! No way!

(the manager is stricken, deathly pale as the team lampoons the strategy)

Strategy needs to connect to reality

By connecting to reality, I mean that while the goal may be to “think out of the box” – you need to take into account how your business operates now, what skills, technical capabilities, existing technology investments, partnerships, clients, etc. exist RIGHT NOW.

Connecting the dots between the current-state of the business, with the future-state of the business, means that the hard work to actually walk that path from here to there, needs to happen, and THAT is all about execution.

Is your team ready? Is your business ready? All of it? A certain piece of it?

Humans are adaptable creatures by nature, but some are more adaptable than others – which is why recommend taking a more scientific approach to understanding which people are equipped to create the brilliant, disruptive ideas, who can run them to actually delivery as a new product or service, who SHOULD be paired up to solve problems, who absolutely should NOT be working on similar teams, and so on. Measure their problem-solving and decision-making strengths, and take the best of the best for each type of problem that comes up, and the odds of successfully solving and executing on the solutions are that much more likely.

While it’s far easier to identify the weaknesses of teams or business models, leveraging the strengths is for many, quite difficult. And while some companies can “turn on a dime” or instigate rapid change throughout the organization, more often, there is a leading and a trailing edge to certain areas of the organization that are likely to make the jump to the future first.

Lead and Pull

Leverage the adapative leaders and pull-through to the rest of your organization, and you just might be able to make your innovation strategy turn into reality.

Interested in finding out how to equip your team with the tools to make innovation happen?

Learn More Two Innovation Training and Assessment Offerings are available

There is a phenomenon in the content management world called SharePoint, which, like it or not, has really changed the level of awareness of electronic content concerns in businesses today.

While SharePoint has nearly made content management a commonplace term in organizations, it’s not as though SharePoint or any other solution is perfect.

To a certain degree, the Basic Content Services of SharePoint will be “good enough” that many businesses will not run into severe problems any time soon.

However, there are a variety of deficiencies of SharePoint that I hear from time to time – one of which is the Red Herring of almost any discussion, which is “will it scale?” Another, relating to businesses who take uptime, availability, and governance seriously is, can you REALLY manage the content in SharePoint as well as we’d like?

Listen to the podcast interview (below) between Ted Orme, Director European Operations for RepliWeb and Dan Keldsen, Co-founder and Principal of Information Architected discussing the pros and cons of SharePoint from a scalability and governance perspective, and how these concerns are not at all NEW to the content world.

If you are currently using SharePoint – have you experienced problems in rolling-out large-scale sites, or changes to those sites?

If you are using alternatives to SharePoint and are considering SharePoint as a supplement or replacement to existing solutions, such as from OpenText, IBM, EMC/Documentum – do you already have practices and processes in place that can easily be transfered to the SharePoint realm?

Please feel free to contribute your comments, concerns and questions, and together, we can make the most of ANY content management system, regardless of the provider. After all, your business is more likely to be about something else OTHER than running a content management system.

Is your Information Architected to get out of the way of your business, or better yet to fully support your business?

Listen now!

Listen to the Interview: IAM Talking: Scaling SharePoint Deployments… and Surviving

Is your Information Architected for SharePoint or Enterprise Content Management as a whole?

Contact us at 
617-933-9655 to discuss how you can reap the benefits of an architecture that will enable you to maximize the value of your content, information and knowledge without pursuing a painful and expensive re-architecting of your systems.

More details on our practices in these areas can be found at:

• Information Architected for SharePoint
• Information Architected for Enterprise Content Management (ECM)

Free resources on SharePoint

We have made a variety of free resources available regarding SharePoint, including a whitepaper written in early 2009, a series of nearly 100 questions answered from client inquiries in recent months, case studies, and more.

• Information Architected Resources for SharePoint (free)