We Define ECM 2.0, Not the Clock


While I was taking some time off for Son 2.0, my friend Jed Cawthorne over the the UK wrote an interesting post on Enterprise 2.0 and ECM 2.0. He refers to a post by Billy Cripe at Oracle talking about what it will all be. Jed then sums up ECM 2.0 as:

Just making stuff look like the ‘consumer’ Web 2.0 apps workers are using at home. What ECM 2.0 will not be is the highly componentized, SOA and standards based dream of Laurence.

Jed sounds more resigned to that definition than excited. Personally, I think we only have to live with that definition if we choose to do so. This isn’t only my dream for ECM, this is one that has been shared by EMC multiple times, and other vendors are prepping, or have prepped, their platforms for ECM 2.0. So why do we have to settle?

I think that people need to remember that just because Web 2.0 is here now, ECM 2.0 doesn’t have to be here at the same time. ECM 2.0 shouldn’t be about looking like and supporting Web 2.0. It should be a next step in the ECM evolution. A product’s major version may be defined by such a change, but ECM 2.0 should be a change in thinking.

Web 1.0 was just a library. Information everywhere. With a minor release, the ability to conduct transactions using Forms was added. That should have been 2.0, but people didn’t want to start counting yet. So 2.0 is the massive move from a library to a social, collaborative world. It is a shift in the paradigm.

Adding AJAX to your ECM User Interface and storing Wiki and Blog content, when you already store all sorts of content already, isn’t a paradigm shift. It is natural growth.

Do you want ECM 2.0 sooner rather than later? I want it sooner, but I’m not going to compromise on what it is in order to get it.

Random thought: If a Web 2.0 application fails to live up to expectations, you can change web sites easily. If an ECM 2.0 application fails, a company will lose lots of money and it will be a year before the next ECM 2.0 application is attempted. An ECM SOA Standard will reduce the chance of failing.

One thought on “We Define ECM 2.0, Not the Clock

  1. As ever a thoughtful post !

    I guess I was feeling quite cynical. I am a big proponent of ‘content centric collaboration’ and much of the ‘enterprise 2.0’ stuff (and its source i.e. web 2.0 stuff) is about collaboration, so is sticking eRoom Enterprise ontop of Documentum Content Server already ECM 2.0 ?? Well not unless eRoom gets an AJAX makeover ….. just joking Laurence 🙂

    I know the whole standards based, SOA approach is not your personal dream, its mine too, and that of everyone else in this corner of the industry, but like I said I had my cynical head on. Ultimately your right, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, its just labels and it does not really matter. Its about useful, useable information management.

    p.s. love the ‘son 2.0’ 🙂

    Like

Comments are closed.