State of the ECM Industry 2010: How are user-strategies changing to meet the demands of a new decade

AIIM Market Intelligence
Delivering the priorities and opinions of AIIM’s 65,000 community

Industry
Watch
State of the ECM Industry 2010
How are user strategies changing to meet the demands of a new decade?

Underwritten in part by: Send to a friend

®

aiim.org I 301.587.8202

About the Research
As the non-profit association dedicated to nurturing, growing and supporting the ECM (Enterprise Content
Management) community, AIIM is proud to provide this research at no charge. In this way the education, thought
leadership and direction provided by our work can be leveraged by the entire community. We would like this research
to be as widely distributed as possible. Feel free to use this research in presentations and publications with the
attribution – “© AIIM 2010, www.aiim.org”

Watch
Rather than redistribute a copy of this report to your colleagues, we would prefer that you direct them to
www.aiim.org/research for a free download of their own.

Our ability to deliver such high-quality research is partially made possible by our underwriting companies, without
whom we would have to return to a paid subscription model.

For that, we hope you will join us in thanking our underwriters, who are:

ASG Software EMC Corporation Nuxeo Rivet Logic
1333 Third Avenue South 176 South Street, 55 Cambridge Street, 1800 Alexander Bell Drive, Suite
Naples, FL 34102 Hopkinton, MA 01748 Burlington, MA, 01803 400, Reston, VA 20191
Phone:+1 (800) 932-5536 Phone: 800.222.3622 or Phone: +1 (781) 328 0520 Phone: +1 (703) 955 3480
Fax: +1 (800) 325-2555 508.435.1000 Email: advisors@nuxeo.com Email: sales@rivetlogic.com
Email: sales@asg.com Fax: 508.497.6904 www.nuxeo.com www.rivetlogic.com

How are user-strategies changing to meet the demands of a new decade?
www.asg.com Email: softwaresales@emc.com
www.emc.com

Process Used, Survey Demographics and Terminology
While we appreciate the support of these sponsors, we also greatly value our objectivity and independence as a non-
profit industry association. The results of the survey and the market commentary made in this report are independent
of any bias from the vendor community.

The survey was taken by 751 individual members of the AIIM community between March 12th and April 5th, 2010,
using a Web-based tool. Invitations to take the survey were sent via e-mail to a selection of the 65,000 AIIM
community members.

Survey population demographics can be found in Appendix A. Graphs throughout the report exclude responses from
suppliers of ECM products or services.

About AIIM
AIIM (www.aiim.org) is the community that provides education, research, and best practices to help organizations
find, control and optimize their information. For more than 60 years, AIIM has been the leading non-profit organization
focused on helping users understand the challenges associated with managing documents, content, records and
business processes. Today, AIIM is international in scope, independent and implementation-focused, acting as the
intermediary between ECM (Enterprise Content Management) users, vendors and the channel.

About the Author
Doug Miles is head of the AIIM Market Intelligence Division. He has over 25 years experience of working with users
and vendors across a broad spectrum of IT applications. He was an early pioneer of document management systems
for business and engineering applications. Doug has also worked closely with other enterprise-level IT systems such
as ERP BI and CRM. Doug has an MSc in Communications Engineering and is an MIET.
,

® © 2010
AIIM - Find, Control, and Optimize Your Information
1100 Wayne Avenue, Suite 1100, Silver Spring, MD 20910
Phone: 301.587.8202
www.aiim.org

© 2010 AIIM - Find, Control, and Optimize Your Information
2

Table of Contents
About the Research: ECM Deployment:
About the Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 ECM Deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Process Used, Survey Demographics Connecting Multiple Repositories . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Watch
and Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Outsourcing, SaaS and Cloud . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
About AIIM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
About the Author . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Enterprise 2.0:
Enterprise 2.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Introduction:
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 ECM Priorities:
Key Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 ECM Priorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

ECM Adoption: Projected Spend:
ECM Adoption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Projected Spend . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Board-level Responsibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Enterprise Scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Conclusion:

System Installed Base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Open Source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Appendix 1 - Survey Demographics:
ECM Business Drivers: Survey Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
ECM Business Drivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Survey Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Cost Reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Organizational Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Geography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Content Chaos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Industry Sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Electronic Documents and Emails . . . . . . . . . . 11 Role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Green ECM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Reasons for Non-Adoption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Underwritten in part by:
ASG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
SharePoint: EMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
SharePoint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Nuxeo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
SharePoint Adoption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Rivet Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
SharePoint and Existing ECM Systems . . . . . . . 14 AIIM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
SharePoint Ownership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

3

Introduction
Enterprise Content Management is at something of a tipping point. Driven by the need to control the content chaos
that pervades local drives, file shares, email systems, and legacy document stores, organizations large and small
are looking to impose order through an ECM project. The positive benefits of information sharing and improved
collaboration are resonating with decision-makers, pushing forward projects to join up repositories and provide
enterprise-wide electronic access. Compliance is seen as an added benefit, but the prime driver is the need to

Watch
maximize employee productivity and enhance their engagement with each other.

ECM product suites, organically grown, or assembled from best-of-breed modules, cover a wide spectrum of
integrated applications, and may be presented as client-server, open source, software-as-a-service or cloud
applications. Vendors range from the largest of the infrastructure suppliers to tiny mobile application start-ups. The
arrival of Microsoft SharePoint 2007 has dramatically changed the scene, filling an initial gap in browser-based
collaboration, but expanding quickly to take a leading market share of the traditional ECM market.

However, there is a general appreciation that ECM is not just a product type, but more of a blanket term to cover a
range of information management technologies for unstructured content. In some organizations, it may be a single
system capable of dealing appropriately with many different types of content. In others it may focus on records
management and compliance, and in others, it may be a portal, connecting multiple repositories and applications.
For some, it is simply a platform to drive content-centric business processes. The common goal is to provide users
with a single-access capability allowing them to find, retrieve, process and archive information from wherever it is
stored, without needing to login to multiple applications.

The objective of this research is to explore the extent to which users are achieving this goal, how they are achieving
it and what effect collaborative technologies such as SharePoint are having on their view of how to do it.

We will reflect upon the drivers and motivations for improved content management, and the degree to which return
on investment is being achieved. Finally, we measure spending plans within the different areas of ECM.

Key Findings
I 36% of organizations surveyed have no ownership at senior executive level of document and records
management.
I 12% of organizations have completed an enterprise-scale ECM project, 28% are in the process of implementing,
and 15% are integrating some projects across departments. 21% have yet to begin an ECM project, although
16% plan to in the next 12 months.
I 17% of organizations are implementing a system for the first time, and 17% are in the process of replacing a
legacy system.
I Open source solutions are being used by 6% of organizations for ECM. This is set for growth, with a further 9%
planning to adopt open source for ECM, WCM (Web Content Management) or portals within the next 2 years.
I 64% of respondents say they would consider open source, citing cost reduction as the most likely reason,
followed by “simplicity/ease of use.”
I Improving efficiency and optimizing business processes are currently the biggest drivers for ECM in most
organizations - by a factor of 2:1 over compliance, whereas 3 years ago they were equal.
I The biggest compliance driver is contract and customer/supplier litigation, followed by financial reporting and
financial audit.
I 60% of new ECM users cite “content chaos” as the trigger for adopting ECM. For non-users, “insufficient
awareness by senior managers” is given as the biggest obstacle.
I As part of their business case, 37% would find it “extremely” or “very useful” to demonstrate the “Green IT”
benefits of ECM, particularly with regard to fewer photocopies and file copies.
I 41% are not confident that their electronic information (excluding emails) is “accurate, accessible, and
trustworthy.” This has improved from 50% in the last 2 years. For those with no system it jumps to 66%, and for
those with full ECM systems it is just 11%.
I 56% are not confident that “emails related to documenting commitments and obligations made by their staff are
recorded, complete, and retrievable”. This has improved only slightly from 61% over the last 2 years. Even
amongst those who have full ECM systems, 49% lack confidence.
I The highest current priorities for ECM activity are “implementing electronic records management” and “managing
emails as records,” followed by “integration of multiple repositories”.

4

I 32% are using portals to provide employees with a single point of access to content repositories across their
organization, compared with 36% who prefer to migrate their content to a single ECM system.
I 34% are taking an active interest in the CMIS interoperability services standard, including 7% who plan to adopt it
in the next year or two.
I 32% of respondents have SharePoint 2007 in use, with 21% currently implementing. The total of 53% compares to
42% in last year’s survey, a proportionate increase of 26% on last year’s user base.

Watch
I With regards to a formal plan or strategy for using SharePoint in relation to other ECM investments, 46% recognize
the need for a plan but don’t have one and a further 12% don’t even know where to start.
I Only 11% cite SharePoint as their sole ECM system: 20% are integrating it with existing systems, 23% describe
SharePoint as working in parallel with their existing ECM system, and 5% consider it to be working in competition.
I The number of users of document management via SaaS (Software as a Service) is set to double in the next 18
months from 6% to 12%. Records management via SaaS is set to grow from 2% to 6%, and email management
from 4% to 6%.
I Currently, 9% of organizations outsource the handling of all inbound documents and a further 4% have plans to.
I Very few organizations are currently using “cloud” solutions for document and records management, the most
popular being use of a “corporate cloud”, with 3% using one now and 2% planning to in the next 18 months.
I 43% of non-government companies said they would possibly use a corporate cloud in the future, and 51% of
government organizations would consider using a government-organized cloud, but only 28% would consider
using a branded cloud (Google, Amazon, Microsoft), even if it was stored within a national locale.
I Regarding social media and Enterprise 2.0, 29% of respondents view internal E2.0 as “imperative” or “significant”
to their organization’s business goals, citing knowledge sharing, team collaboration and project coordination as
the main drivers.
I 21% of respondents regard use of external social media as “imperative” or “significant” particularly as a marketing

tool for publicity, and for customer feedback.
I Staff access to Facebook, Twitter, You Tube and Instant Messaging is barred in 45% of organizations.
I Instant messages, Twitter posts and blog posts are not archived in 80% of the organizations using them.
I 60% find it easier to locate “knowledge” on the Web than on internal systems, and 59% agree that social
networking will make a dramatic change to business life in the next few years. However, 56% are inclined to see
Twitter as a timewaster rather than “an important rapid-feedback tool”.
I Net overall spending on licenses in all ECM applications is set to increase considerably over the next 12 months
compared to the last 12 months, and spend on consultancy services is likely to increase slightly overall.
Outsource services and training are predicted to be flat as are scanner hardware sales. These compare with last
year’s indicated decline in all hardware and services, and near flat sales of licenses.

5

ECM Adoption
Board-level Responsibility
Compared to other enterprise-level applications, there is no clear view of ECM ownership, despite its mainstream
adoption. In 28% of organizations, CIOs (Chief Information Officers) are the principle owners, but often from the
technology point of view, rather than the “Information” aspect. In 15% of companies, there are dedicated Chief

Watch
Records Officers (CROs) or Chief Compliance Officers (CCOs). Elsewhere, authority is spread across senior
executive staff in the finance and legal departments.

In total, 36% of organizations do not have a board-level executive specifically tasked with document and records
management, including 10% who have no one at all tasked with this. It seems likely that some of the further findings
in this report are a reflection of this lack of appropriate ownership.

Figure 1: Who is the highest person in your organization having specific reporting authority, or management ownership, of
document and records management? (N=673. Note: all graphs exclude responses from ECM suppliers)

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

CIO or Head of IT
CRO/Head of RM/Head of Inf. Mgmt.
Manager within IT department
Records or DM professional

CEO, Managing Director, Head of Site
Chief Legal Officer/Corporate Secretary
CFO or Head of Finance
Chief Compliance Officer
Other VP/Board level
Other
Nobody has a specific report

Enterprise Scale
Over half of the organizations within the AIIM community are breaking out of departmental information silos and are
moving towards enterprise-wide content management. In this survey, 12% have already completed an enterprise
scale or company-wide capability, albeit that true ECM has become something of a moving target. Additional content
types such as email, voice, video, instant messaging and blog posts have extended the scope of what can be
termed “Content”. Meanwhile, e-discovery has created the goal of a single, discoverable records management
environment which includes repositories in other key enterprise applications not previously included, such as ERP
and CRM.

6

Figure 2: How would you best characterize your organization’s experience with document management (DM), electronic records
management (RM) and Enterprise Content Management (ECM)? (N=680)

Completed an Have not yet
enterprise scale or begun and have no
company-wide plans, 5%
capability, 12%

Watch
Have not yet
begun but have
plans in next 12
months, 16%

Implemen ng an
enterprise scale or
company-wide
capability, 28%

One or more
projects at the
departmental level,
Integra ng projects 24%

across
departments, 15%

In terms of providing all knowledge workers within the business with useful content services, 17% of organizations have
achieved over 90% staff coverage, and 60% of organizations have rolled out benefits to more than half of their staff.

System Installed Base
It would be easy to assume a linear adoption model based on the purchase of a single ECM system, but the reality is
that over a third of organizations have multiple systems, or legacy systems that are due for replacement. In terms of
those buying new systems, 17% are planning or implementing a system for the first time, and 17% are replacing
existing systems.

There is also a common perception that ECM projects are prone to failure and that systems fall into disuse, but only
6% of our respondents reported a failed implementation.

Figure 3: How would you best describe your past history with ECM projects? (N=673)
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

We have been using our current system for
1-5 years and will con nue to use it
We have been using our current system for
over 5 years and will con nue to use it
We have a number of systems and will
con nue to use them
Our previous project didn’t really work out
so we are in limbo right now
We have a number of legacy systems, but
are going forward with just one of them
We are replacing one or more legacy
systems with a new system
We are planning/implemen ng a system
for the ﬁrst me

None of these
7

Open Source
There are some well-established ECM suites that use the open source model, with a 6% installed base in our survey,
along with 3% for web content management and 2% for portals. This is set for considerable growth, with a further 9%
stating plans to adopt open source within the next 2 years.

Figure 4: Do you have plans to implement an open source ECM system or portal? (N=613)

Watch
0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7%

Already have Open Source ECM system in use

Already have Open Source informa on access
portal in use
Already have Open Source Web Content
Management in use

Plans in next 12 months

Plans in next 2 years

Most respondents have an open mind on the use of open source, with 64% stating that they would consider it.

Reduced cost of initial licences and ongoing support are given as the most likely reasons, closely followed by
“Simplicity/ease of use.”

Figure 5: Which two of the following potential benefits would mostly lead you to investigate an open source ECM product? (N=613)

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

Lower ongoing support costs
Lower ini al cost
Simplicity/ease of use
Customiza on capability
Reduced vendor-lock in
Community addi ons in ver cal applica ons
Bad experience with previous vendor
Would not consider Open Source

Over half of organizations are moving to multi-department or enterprise-wide ECM deployment. Where new systems
are being implemented, half are replacement and half are first-time users. Potential users consider that open source
has considerable cost benefits and its use is set to grow considerably.

8

ECM Business Drivers
AIIM has been measuring the primary drivers for ECM adoption for 6 years. During that time, the usage of ECM has
broadened and the macro-economic conditions have also changed considerably.

Cost Reduction

Watch
Across the user base, improving efficiency and optimizing business process are the two strongest drivers, followed
by compliance and risk mitigation.

Figure 6: When you consider your document and records management projects and priorities, what is the most
significant business driver for your organization? (N=678)

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

Improve eﬃciency
Op mize business processes
Compliance
Mi gate risk
Reduce costs
Enable collabora on

Improve customer service
Faster turnaround/Improved response
Compe ve advantage

Grouping these factors into Cost, Compliance, Customer Service and Collaboration, we see the mid-decade effect of
stronger regulation being overhauled by the more recent recessionary imperative of reducing costs. Customer
service as a primary driver continues to fall. The Collaboration driver was not measured in previous years.

Figure 7: Comparison of overall ECM drivers from previous AIIM surveys.

60%

50%

40% Cost/Eﬃciency
30% Compliance/Risk
20% Customer Service

10% Collabora on

0%
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Compliance
Compliance covers a wide range of issues, particularly across different industry sectors. It is interesting to see,
therefore, that litigation around customer and supplier contracts is the strongest common thread amongst our
surveyed organizations, followed by statutory financial reporting.

9

Figure 8: Thinking about the compliance benefits of ECM and Records Management, which of the following are the TWO most
important compliance drivers in your organization? (N=678)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Contract/customer/supplier li ga on

Watch
Financial repor ng/Sarbanes-Oxley
Your financial audit
Your own ISO quality programs
Industry specific regula ons
Employee regula ons
Health and safety regula ons
Compe on regula on/fair-trading
Patent protec on

Content Chaos
Although cost reduction and compliance are the two formal benefits that make the business case for ECM, we asked
those who are in the process of planning an ECM project what factors had triggered their decision. Perhaps one of
the most interesting data points in the survey is that “Content Chaos” is the strongest driver by far.

The pull-through effect of SharePoint is mentioned by 22%, although only 4% of those have been swayed by its
perceived affordability.

Figure 9: What would you say are the two main reasons that triggered your organization’s decision to plan an ECM system?
(N=112, Planned Users)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Our content chaos is ge ng out-of-hand
and we need to control it
Keen to maximize knowledge-sharing for
our increasingly dispersed workforce
We need to improve our ability to respond
to, or pursue li ga on
We want to use SharePoint for many things
including document management
We have had compliance issues due to poor
record-keeping
Our industry is coming under increasing
regula on
We realize that we have no way to manage
important emails
We feel that the ROI from scanned
forms/invoices/mail is now well proven
It has become much more affordable due
to SharePoint

10

Looking more specifically into management of all content types across all users, we see that there are still major
areas of content that are, as yet, uncontrolled.

Figure 10: How are the following content types managed and archived in your organization?
(N=585, Line length indicates “Not Applicable”)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Watch
Scanned documents
Electronic documents
Faxes
Emails
Photo images
Ac ve web pages
Archived web pages
Audio recordings
Video/CCTV recordings
Telephone recordings
Internal blog posts
Instant messages
External blog posts
Twi er posts

ECM/RM system Stand-alone management system Well organized ﬁleshare Not managed at all

In particular, Twitter posts and external blogs are largely unmanaged in the organizations that use them, which given
their public exposure is a concern. Instant messages are also poorly managed and archived, with just 16% of the
organizations that use them exercising some control.

Figure 10 also indicates the preferred use of dedicated management systems for some file types, such as email, web
pages, audio and video rather than incorporation within an ECM system.

Cost reduction and improved process efficiency are well ahead of compliance as the main macro-drivers for ECM,
but “content chaos” is the most likely trigger to initiate a project.

Electronic Documents and Emails
Two questions (Table 1) have characterized the AIIM State of the Industry survey over the years, bringing home the
compliance issue across electronic documents and emails.

Table 1: Confidence in retrievability

Slightly Not confident
Confidence in retrievability Total
confident at all

How confident are you, that if challenged, your organization
could demonstrate that your electronic information (excluding 26% 15% 41%
emails) is accurate, accessible, and trustworthy?

How confident are you that emails related to documenting
commitments and obligations made by you and your staff are 30% 26% 56%
recorded, complete, and retrievable?

Looking at these results over the last few years indicates that some progress is being made in electronic documents,
but not for emails.

11

Figure 11: How confident are you regarding the accuracy and retrievability of your electronic documents and emails?
(Percent slightly or not at all confident N=674)
70%
60%
50%

Watch
40%
Electronic informa on
30%
Emails
20%
10%
0%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Taking a comparison within the data against levels of ECM system adoption shows that user organizations are
achieving the promised benefits within general electronic documents, but are still grappling with the email issue.

Figure 12: How confident are you regarding the accuracy and retrievability of your electronic documents and emails? (N=674)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Electronic Informa on
No system
Departmental
Full ECM

Emails
No system
Departmental
Full ECM

Although managing the volume of emails coming into large organizations is a daunting task, a disappointing number
have yet to take even basic steps to ensure retention and discovery.

Figure 13: Which of the following would best describe standard practice in your organization
for dealing with “important” emails? (N=607)
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%

File in personal Outlook folders
Capture to general purpose ECM/DM/RM
system
Save individual emails to network document
ﬁleshare
Capture to dedicated email management
system

Print emails and ﬁle as paper

Copy/transfer to Shared Folders in Outlook

12

Obviously, relying on personal Outlook folders is not a good policy: they are not visible by others, they are not
searchable for e-discovery, and there is a strong chance that the Outlook Auto-Archive function will move them off to
a file on the local hard drive. 12% admit to printing important emails and filing them as paper, although the true
number is probably much higher. This is at least taking a view that important emails are records, albeit a somewhat
non-Green one.

Email management is still the biggest content issue within ECM, and even those with well-developed ECM systems

Watch
are failing to bring it under control.

Green ECM
Although users did not list Green IT as a primary driver for ECM adoption, 11% felt it would be “extremely useful” and
26% “very useful” to demonstrate the “Green IT” benefits of ECM to make their business case. From the sample, 55%
cite fewer photocopies and file copies as the biggest green benefit, followed by 35% who consider lower running
costs for office space and paper warehouses, and reduced data-center costs, to be an advantage. Less travel to
meetings and more working from home were considered by 15% of the sample to be the most important benefits.

Reasons for Non-Adoption
For those who have no plans to implement ECM, insufficient awareness by senior management was given as the
strongest reason and in particular, insufficient understanding of ECM by the IT department or the lack of an individual
tasked with the responsibility. Cost was the next biggest reason.

SharePoint

Adoption of SharePoint in the last three years as an IT infrastructure platform has been phenomenal, and much of its
success has been due to its browser-based collaboration capabilities. IT departments in particular have been keen to
adopt the team-sites concept for project coordination and knowledge sharing. SharePoint is also capable of
providing a large proportion of the functionality previously associated with dedicated ECM suites, albeit to a lower
level of capability than the feature-rich, industry-sector optimizations available in many of the traditional products. In
many companies, this has produced confusion with regard to existing rollouts and the definition of future strategies.

SharePoint Adoption

Figure 14: Have you implemented Microsoft SharePoint 2007 (WSS/MOSS) in your organization? (N=638)

SharePoint 2010 in
use, or imminent
Oﬃce SharePoint use, 3% No, and no plans,
Server 2007 MOSS
28%
in use, 22%

Windows
SharePoint Services
3.0 WSS in use, 7%

Plans in next 12-18
months, 13%
Implemen ng 2007, 16%

Using 2003 but
implemen ng Using SharePoint
2007, 5% 2003, 8%

13

In total, 32% of our respondents have SharePoint 2007 in use, with a further 21% in the process of implementing,
making a total of 53% of the survey. This compares to 42% in last year’s survey, a proportionate increase of 26% on
last year’s user base. A further 21% have plans for 2007 in the next 12-18 months, or are already using SharePoint
2003. At the time of writing this report, SharePoint 2010 is shortly to be released, and 3% indicate here that they are
already using the Beta. Within the next 18 months, 45% of users plan to upgrade to the 2010 version.

SharePoint and Existing ECM Systems

Watch
Unfortunately, in more than half of organizations, the rollout of SharePoint functionality is taking place in a very
unplanned manner in relation to existing ECM deployments. 46% agree that they need a plan as to where each will
be used, but don’t have one. A further 12% do not know where to start.

Figure 15: Do you have a formal plan or strategy in place describing where you will utilize your SharePoint investments and where
you will utilize other ECM investments? (N=447 SharePoint users, excl 81 “Not sure”)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

We have a formal plan in place and it is in
produc on today

We have a formal roadmap of where each
will be used but it is not executed

We do not have a formal plan, although
we see the need for one

We do not have a formal plan, nor a
star ng point to develop one

With regard to the overall strategy of how SharePoint co-exists with existing ECM deployments, there would appear to
be a degree of conflict in 28% of organizations where the two work in parallel, or in competition. For 30%, SharePoint
is selectively used to fill in some functions, and for 20% it acts as a portal to existing suites, or utilizes them for
repository services.

Figure 16: Which of the following would you use to best describe your current or planned use of SharePoint in your organization
with regard to your existing ECM, DM and RM suites? (N=442 SharePoint users)

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Works in compe on
Works in parallel
Fills in some func ons
Acts as a portal to our exis ng suites
Sits on top of our DM/RM repository
SharePoint is our ECM suite
None of these

SharePoint Ownership
Due to its heritage as an IT-led project, the ECM aspects of SharePoint are likely to have been left trailing in many
organizations, with 30% suggesting that there is no input from the Records Management department. For a further
22%, the deployment has been managed on a departmental level, suggesting very little in the way of coordinated
governance structures and fileplans. In 5% of organizations, our respondents indicated that no one is in charge and it
is completely out-of-control. It is perhaps reassuring that this number is down from 12% in last year’s survey.

14

Figure 17: Which of the following would best describe who is driving and controlling SharePoint sites and applications in your
organization? (N=437 SharePoint users)
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Records Management

Watch
IT with input from Records Management

IT with no input from Records
Management

Managed on a departmental level

No one, but we have set up rules and
policies for site crea on and structure

No one, and it's completely out-of-control

SharePoint has become or is likely to become a dominant presence in 74% of responding organizations, creating
uncertainty as to how it fits with existing ECM deployments. 58% of users do not have a plan covering which
functions in SharePoint will be used.

ECM Deployment
Connecting Multiple Repositories
As described in the introduction, the ultimate goal of ECM is to provide users with a single-access capability allowing
them to find, retrieve, process and archive information from wherever it is stored, without needing to log in to multiple
applications. This can be achieved by migrating content into a single enterprise-wide ECM system, either as a one-off
process, or as a service which collects defined records from ERP HR or line-of-business systems and moves them to a
,
single repository. Alternatively, it may be achieved using a single-sign-on portal accessing multiple repositories.

Figure 18: Thinking about your plans in the next 2 years to provide employees with a single point of access to content repositories
across your organization, which of the following is the best description of the approach you plan to take or have taken? (N=633)

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

Migrate content to a centralized ECM
system
Provide a single-sign-on portal using
SharePoint
Provide a single-sign-on portal using an
alterna ve provider
Provide a single-sign-on portal using Open
Source
Use only a dedicated Enterprise Search
engine

Not planning to link up repositories

We do not have any signiﬁcant
repositories to link up

15

As we can see, 36% of organizations feel able to migrate content to a centralized ECM system, whereas 32% are
utilizing a single-sign-on portal connecting several repositories, with two-thirds using SharePoint for this. Whilst
Enterprise Search can provide a single point of access, there is a realization that it cannot by itself add any degree of
management or apply legal hold on documents. The number of organizations depending on Enterprise Search has
fallen from 9% last year to 5% this year.

Table 2: CMIS

Watch
Not sure what Looking Plans in the next
Content Management Interoperability Services
it is into it 12-24 months

What are your plans with regard to CMIS (Content
Management Interoperability Services)? 54% 26% 7%

The growing awareness of CMIS as an emerging services standard for interconnection of repositories is
encouraging, with 26% showing an interest compared to 16% in a previous survey less than 12 months ago, and with
7% having positive plans for its use.

Outsourcing, SaaS and Cloud
Compared to the 39% of organizations that make use of the traditional outsourcing of paper records archives or box
stores, outsourcing of electronic records is only used by 14%, although another 9% of organizations have plans in the
next 18 months. In a similar way, there is considerably more growth potential in outsourcing of complete business
processes than in traditional document or forms scanning, with the 7% currently doing this set to grow to 12%.

Looking at the Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) model for outsourcing the document management system itself, only
6% of organizations currently do this, but this is set to double in the next 18 months. Offsite management of emails
also seems set to grow over the next 18 months to 10%, from a small current base of 4%.

Figure 19: Do you use outsourcing for any of the following ECM functions?
(N=599, note: takes no account of those planning to give up these services)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Records archive - paper
Document or forms scanning
Capture/indexing/keying
Outbound document produc on
Using now
Records archive - electronic
Plan in next 18 months
Handling of all inbound documents
Complete business processes
Document management via SaaS
Email management via SaaS
Records management via SaaS

Regarding “Cloud” solutions for ECM, there is a very low base of existing users, the most popular being use of a
“corporate cloud”, with 3% using one now and 2% planning to in the next 18 months. There is an understandable
reticence to entrust documents and records to third-party clouds, even if these are provided by trusted brands such
as Google, Amazon, or Microsoft. Only 28% would consider using a branded cloud even if it was stored within a
national (onshore) locale.

16

Many large corporations are moving towards a corporate cloud, in that centralizing and virtualizing their data farms
creates a de-facto cloud. This would encourage 51% to consider using it. Similarly, given the sensitivity of data within
government organizations, there have been suggestions that the government itself might set up a trusted cloud. Even
so, only 51% of government organizations would consider using a government-organized cloud.

Figure 20: Do you have plans to use a “Cloud” solution or Cloud storage for your document and records management?
(Cloud = off-premise, on an un-specified server)

Watch
(N=585)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%100%

Local (iden fiable) outsource

Government organized cloud

Corporate cloud
Google/MS/Amazon/etc cloud within defined
na onal locale
Google/MS/Amazon/etc cloud stored
anywhere

Google apps/docs to replace MS-Office

Using now Plan in next 18 months Possibly Wouldn't use

Outsourcing of records and email management, and ECM deployment through a SaaS model seem set to grow,
although still to less than 12% of the base. Cloud storage will require reliable corporate or government clouds if it is to
become popular.

Enterprise 2.0
We have found in previous surveys that the majority of the AIIM base would prefer to source their Enterprise 2.0
functionality, such as collaboration tools, forums, blogs and wikis, as part of their ECM suite. This is a rapidly
changing area, and we have noticed a number of changes since our last dedicated Enterprise 2.0 Industry Watch
survey in June 2009.

In particular, there is more differentiation in the use of external or public social media for accessing customer input
and for publicity, compared to internal use of similar tools for collaboration and staff communication. Having said
that, 21% of respondents regard use of external social media as “imperative” or “significant” for their organization,
particularly as a marketing tool for publicity, and for customer feedback. Meanwhile, 29% of respondents regard
internal E2.0 as “imperative” or “significant” to their organization’s business goals, citing knowledge sharing, team
collaboration and project coordination as the main drivers.

When asked specifically about key drivers for use of external social media in their organizational unit, promotion and
customer feedback were the two most likely uses, followed by “as a knowledge resource for staff to research
answers (e.g., Trip Advisor/ Facebook/ LinkedIn/ Twitter).” However, there are still major concerns about potential time
wasting, virus exposure and data usage on these sites in that over 45% of organizations bar access to Facebook,
YouTube, Twitter and instant messaging.

17

Regarding internal social media and Enterprise 2.0, better use of shared knowledge is the primary benefit, followed
by increased collaboration and better project coordination.

Figure 21: Which THREE of the following would you say are the key drivers for internal Social Media/collaboration/Enterprise 2.0
in your organizational unit? (N=568)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Watch
Be er use of shared knowledge
Increase collabora on within and between
teams

Be er project management and coordina on
Be er communica on between management
and staff
Brokering - bringing together people and
exper se

Reduce travel and mee ngs costs

Self-service facili es for staff and new recruits
Be er cohesion and social inclusion between

staff
Be er sharing of compe tor updates, product
problems, etc.
None of these

There is no doubt that concerns about external social networking can reflect on the productive adoption of Enterprise
2.0, although there can also be positive reinforcement.

Table 3: Social media

Strongly
Social media Agree Total
Agree

Social networking will make a dramatic change to business life
in the next few years 47% 12% 59%

It is easier to locate “knowledge” on the Web than it is to find it
on our internal systems 39% 21% 60%

There is a strong risk of exposing company-confidential
information via social networking 45% 23% 68%

Twitter is more of a time waster than an important rapid-
feedback tool for business use 28% 15% 43%

In this survey we found much less difference of opinion between age bands than we have previously found, perhaps
reflecting a more general awareness across the demographic.

18

ECM Priorities
As stated earlier, many organizations consider their ECM deployment to be a work-in-progress, as additional content
types are brought into the frame, and compliance requirements grow and change. Although earlier in the report we
saw that cost-saving was considered the key corporate driver for investment in ECM, the main preoccupation for
most system managers would seem to be compliance. A key finding here is that electronic records management is
the biggest key focus, and within that, managing emails as records is a priority. Next comes integration of

Watch
repositories, which is a productivity issue, but next on the list, e-discovery, is an additional compliance issue.

Figure 22: What would you say are the three most important ECM issues or current projects for you right now? (N=607)

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

Implemen ng electronic records management
Managing emails as records
Integra on of mul ple repositories
Ge ng an ECM project oﬀ the ground
E-Discovery
Enterprise search
Agreeing to a corporate taxonomy or ﬁleplan
SharePoint deployment
Collabora on and E2.0

SharePoint governance
Long term archive
Moving to an integrated capture pla orm
Moving to an integrated BPM pla orm
Accessing content on mobile devices
Moving to an SaaS or Cloud model
None of these

The highest current priority for system managers is implementing electronic records management, particularly
emails.

Projected Spend
Net overall spending on ECM software licenses is set for a considerable net increase over the next 12 months
compared to the last 12 months, and net spend on consultancy services is likely to increase slightly overall.
Outsource services and training are predicted to be flat. These compare with last year‘s indicated declines in all
services and training, and near flat sales of licenses.

19

Figure 23: How do you think your organization’s ECM spending in the following areas will be in the next 12 months compared to the
previous 12 months? (N=570, non-trade. Shorter lines indicate, “We don’t spend anything on this”)

25% 0% 25% 50%

Ongoing maintenance cost

Watch
So ware licenses

Vendor consultancy services

Independent consultancy services

Outsourcing/bureau services

External training

Much less Less Same More Much more

Regarding specific products, considerable net growth is indicated in all software areas, particularly the core areas of
document and records management, and workflow/BPM. Hardware sales of scanners and MFPs look set to be level
year-on-year, which is an improvement on last year’s indicated decline.

Figure 24: How do you think your organization’s spending on the following products and applications in the next
12 months will compare with what was actually spent in the last 12 months?
(N=570, non-trade. Shorter lines indicate, “We don’t spend anything on this”)

25% 0% 25% 50%

Document Management
Electronic Records Management
Workﬂow/Business Process Management
Collabora on products
SharePoint
Enterprise Search
Email Management
Web Content Management
Portals
Enterprise 2.0 technologies (wikis, blogs, etc.)
Legal discovery
Recogni on and capture technologies (OCR/ICR)
Digital Asset Management
Produc on scanners
Invoice Automa on
Mul -Func on Devices/MFPs
Digital Mailroom

Much less Less Same More Much more

Indicated net spend on licences shows a considerable increase for the next 12 months, with a smaller but still
significant increase in net spend on consultancy services and training.

20

Conclusion
ECM has often been seen in the past as somewhat aspirational, aiming to bring central control to all unstructured
information across the organization, rather than as a practical application to improve access to valuable shared
content. The point we have reached as we enter the new decade is that good information governance is now
accepted as essential to good business, and that ECM, as a combination of technology, policy and process, can

Watch
indeed provide good information governance and improved compliance. However, it can also bring major
collaboration and knowledge-sharing improvements as well as efficiency cost-savings to the business process. As
we have seen in this report, the final tipping point for users would seem to be the content chaos that is overtaking
their file shares, email systems and distributed repositories across the enterprise. We are therefore seeing a real will
within the user base to create workable ECM systems, linking repositories together, and extending content and
records management across multiple media types.

Some of the impetus for this new take up in ECM has undoubtedly come from the arrival on the scene of SharePoint,
and a majority of organizations are now using it, albeit with considerable confusion in many places as to how it fits
with existing ECM systems. In parallel, there is a small but growing interest in alternative delivery platforms such as
SaaS and Cloud, and a willingness to adopt open source products.

The conclusion, therefore, is that ECM is in a healthy state, better understood with regard to its positive benefits for
knowledge-sharing and collaboration, and making progress in compliance and control across many content types,
albeit that emails are still proving to be a challenge.


21

Appendix 1: Survey Demographics
Survey Background
The survey was taken by 751 individual members of the AIIM community between March 12th and April 5th, 2010,
using a Web-based tool. Invitations to take the survey were sent via email to a selection of the 65,000 AIIM

Watch
community members.

Organizational Size
Survey respondents represented organizations of all sizes. Larger organizations over 5,000 employees represented
31%, with mid-sized organizations of 500 to 5,000 employees at 43%. Small-to-mid sized organizations with 10 to 500
employees constitute 26%. Organizations of less than 10 employees were not included in the report.

11-100 emps
over 10,000
9%
emps
20%
101-500 emps
17%

5,001-10,000
emps
11%

501-1,000
emps
1,001-5,000 14%
emps
29%

Geography
77% of the participants were based in North America, with most of the remainder from Europe.

Cent. / Other, 5%
S.America, 1%
Australasia, 3%
Mainland
Europe, 6%
UK & Ireland,
8%

Canada, 15% US, 62%

22

Industry Sector
Local and National Government made up 28%, Finance, Banking and Insurance 15%, Utilities, Telecom Oil and Gas
12%. The remaining sectors are evenly split. To avoid bias, suppliers of ECM have been removed from all of the
report, but consultants have been included as they are a small part of the sample, and are likely to be ECM users in
their own right.

Watch
Consultants, 2% Media, Publishing,
Charity, Not-for- Web, 2% Other, 7% Gov. & Public Svcs
Profit, 2% - Local/State, 19%
Retail, Transport,
Real Estate, 3%
Prof. Svcs and
Legal, 3%
Pharmaceu cal Gov. & Public Svcs
and chemicals, 3% - Na onal, 9%

IT & High Tech—
not ECM, 3%

Healthcare, 5%

Finance, Banking,
Engineering & Insurance, 15%
Construc on, 5%

Educa on, 5% U li es,
Telecoms, Oil &
Manufacturing, Gas, 12%
6%

Role
Records management, information management and compliance staff make up 38% of respondents. IT staff
constitute 26%, consultants or project managers, 18%, and line-of-business managers and chief executives 7%.

President, CEO, Other, 10% Head of
Managing records/
Line-of- Director, 1% compliance/
business informa on
execu ve or management,
process owner, 13%
6%

Consultant or Records or
Project document
Manager, 18% management
staff, 25%

Head of IT, 6%
IT staff, 20%

23

UNDERWRITTEN IN PART BY

ASG
ASG’s enterprise content management portfolio enables business users and infrastructure technology

Watch
management of all skill levels to quickly and easily access, manage, and own all essential business information.
ASG’s enterprise content management portfolio includes
ASG-ViewDirect® is a powerful enterprise content ASG-Records Manager™ provides comprehensive life-cycle
management and archiving solution that captures, indexes, management for all electronic records in their original format,
stores, links and publishes content, in any format (Microsoft including holds, automatic folder structures, and advanced
Word, Email, PDF, JPEG, XML, HTML, etc.), from any source, retention—with parametric events that automatically execute
and delivers it throughout your enterprise. from line-of-business applications through standard Web
ASG-Total Content Integrator™ (TCI) incorporates Services. ASG-Records Manager has been tuned specifically
authentication, federated search, index normalization, and for managing records in high-volume environments.
content transformation services. ASG-TCI can be Classification, retention and disposition management
supplemented with an optional module, ASG-TCI for MOSS, activities can be automatically performed or coordinated by
to integrate and augment the capabilities of Microsoft® Office authorized users depending on individual record type
SharePoint® Server (MOSS) 2007. requirements.
ASG-WorkflowDirect® incorporates process automation for ASG-Cypress® is a comprehensive document assembly
integrating content with business processes, people and and delivery system. It captures and stores any document or
computer systems, while coordinating, managing, image, regardless of format, application, or environment in
automating, and measuring content-centric processes which it was created. Once captured in the powerful and
independent of underlying applications. secured DocuVault repository, documents, individual pages
or images can be easily searched, retrieved, assembled, and
ASG-ViewDirect® E-mail Manager is a complete email

delivered via distributed print, fax, e-mail, PDF attachment,
management solution based on the world’s most powerful Web, PDA, etc.
content repository. ASG-ViewDirect E-mail Manager captures,
archives, indexes and applies retention to email from user
mailboxes or from journal capture points.
www.asg.com

EMC Corporation
EMC Corporation is the world’s leading developer and provider of information infrastructure technology and
solutions that enable organizations of all sizes to transform the way they compete and create value from their
information. Information about EMC’s products and services can be found at www.EMC.com.

EMC Documentum
The EMC Documentum family of enterprise content management solutions provides a comprehensive, fully-
unified software platform to manage and leverage content in a cost-effective, controlled manner, providing
secured access and re-use across the enterprise. It combines a unified platform with a strong compliance
infrastructure to support key business needs including collaboration, business process management, web
content management, document capture, customer communications management and archiving.
To learn more about EMC Documentum, please visit www.software.emc.com/documentum.

www.emc.com

24

UNDERWRITTEN IN PART BY

Nuxeo
Enterprise Content Management is our focus. As a software vendor with global reach, Nuxeo is among a

Watch
handful of pioneering software companies dedicated to accelerating open source acceptance into mainstream
enterprise.
Founded in 2000, Nuxeo is an ECM innovator with offices in Europe and North America. Our customers and
partners represent numerous vertical industries across the globe. Our success is measured on the strength of
our product and community: high customer satisfaction rates, strategic partnerships, collaborative approaches
to content-centric applications.
Nuxeo has delivered on its product strategy: ECM as a platform for content applications. The spectrum of our
open source ECM offerings include the foundation platform - Nuxeo EP and packaged applications - Nuxeo
,
DM and Nuxeo DAM - built from this extensible platform. Addressing the needs of both horizontal and vertical
ECM requirements, Nuxeo ensures that customers, systems integrators, and solution builders with deep
domain expertise can create and deploy content applications to meet specific business needs
Founded on the principles of open source, Nuxeo is passionate about community: the ecosystem of our
customers and partners who run their critical content-centric applications on our platform. Open source
ensures that these external stakeholders have full visibility into the not only the source code but the roadmap
and ongoing commitment to standards and platforms. Clients, integrators and our own developers come
together to share ideas, integrations and code to deliver value to the larger user base.

To learn more about Nuxeo – open source ECM please visit us at www.nuxeo.com

www.nuxeo.com

Rivet Logic
Rivet Logic is a professional services firm that helps organizations better engage with customers, improve
collaboration, and streamline business operations through open source enterprise content management and
collaboration solutions. Rivet Logic addresses many of today’s workplace challenges with ECM solutions that
enable organizations to transform traditional content repositories and static intranets into dynamic, collaborative
work environments through open source functionality. Through effective digital content management,
streamlined workflow, optimized search and retrieval capability, and social media integration, our ECM solutions
result in accelerated end-user adoption, increased productivity, cost savings and optimal business value.
Although most companies remain unaware, a new wave of emerging commercially supported, open source
ECM applications can help enterprises dramatically improve productivity while keeping IT costs under control. In
many respects open source has now equaled and even surpassed the capabilities of proprietary, traditional
software alternatives.
Features of leading open source ECM applications include:
• Rules-based document repository that replaces the shared enterprise content management systems and repositories,
network drive enterprise portals, and wikis.
• Effective search & retrieval utilizing content modeling and Enterprises of all sizes can benefit by considering the following
federated and cross-repository search open source software technologies:
• Seamless repository interfaces based on standards (CIFS, • Alfresco, an open source ECM platform that provides a
WebDAV, FTP) strong foundation for enterprise content management and
• Library services, version control and file check-in/check-out collaboration. Alfresco was co-founded by John Newton,
• Collaboration features – wiki, discussion forum, blog who also co-founded Documentum.
• Workflow • Document imaging • Records management • Liferay, an open source portal for team collaboration and
enterprise-wide intranets. In addition, portals provide
• Security – LDAP & Active Directory
support for personalization and aggregation of enterprise
The types of commercially backed, open source enterprise content and applications
applications that support document management include
www.rivetlogic.com
25

®

AIIM (www.aiim.org) is the community that provides education, research, and best practices to help
organizations find, control, and optimize their information.

For over 60 years, AIIM has been the leading non-profit organization focused on helping users to
understand the challenges associated with managing documents, content, records, and business
processes. Today, AIIM is international in scope, independent, implementation-focused, and, as the
representative of the entire ECM industry - including users, suppliers, and the channel - acts as the
industry’s intermediary.

© 2010
AIIM
1100 Wayne Avenue, Suite 1100
Silver Spring, MD 20910
301.587.8202
www.aiim.org


State of the ECM Industry 2010: How are user-strategies changing to meet the demands of a new decade

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (8)

Similar to State of the ECM Industry 2010: How are user-strategies changing to meet the demands of a new decade

Similar to State of the ECM Industry 2010: How are user-strategies changing to meet the demands of a new decade (20)

More from Vander Loto

More from Vander Loto (6)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

State of the ECM Industry 2010: How are user-strategies changing to meet the demands of a new decade