Well, it didn’t take long, but my first post on Standards has drawn some attention. James McGovern deconstructs my post doesn’t appear to pull many punches (though he may very well have done so). If you are in the ECM space, read his post. It offers an interesting view on the ECM space from the outside. While I had thought about waiting to respond until I had heard from others, my faith that I will hear from others on this topic is not very high. I would love to be proven incorrect. I welcome the feedback, but I’d like to hear from some ECM people.

I think I will start by saying that I agree with James on most points and he has a lot of valid questions. For some of them I know the answer. For others I don’t but plan to find out. And for a few I’m not sure if I can get the answers. I will be posting more on Standards as I go forward and learn more. I need to learn more first so that I don’t completely cut anyone off at the knees unfairly. Those that deserve it on the other hand….

The point of my post was mostly to mention the little I know about EMC’s efforts and remark on how my view of Standards has changed over time and recently. They are important and we need them, yesterday. Now that I’ve had this realization, I plan on making others care as well.

I will answer one question, what my definition of leaders in the ECM marketplace is. It is a very narrow definition of leading. I was referring to those that lead in the vision of what ECM is. These are the people that developed an ECM platform that can serve all parts of the Enterprise, not necessarily a platform that works as a part of the Enterprise. The type of leader that is needed, that James refers to, may not exist yet. I reserve my final judgment until I can confirm my gut on this issue.