I’ve been ranting on and off for a while that Information Management has failed because we haven’t met the needs of the user. This is leaving the market open for the Cloud vendors to try and disrupt the Content Management market.
What I haven’t delved into is that the primary reason we have been failing is also the key to the potential success of the Cloud vendors…Records Management.
[Note that my post on the 2010 Quadrant is now available.]
Thanks to the Documentum voters splitting their time between two topics, discussing the recent Gartner MQ for ECM is today’s topic. The voting was an interesting little diversion that I’ll revisit later.
I’m going to talk about the report here. The recent controversy around Gartner is a post for another day.
Last year I was threatened (my word) by Gartner for putting a copy of the MQ here. I was also chastised for several other nitpicks. So I will only link to Oracle’s courtesy copy of the 2009 Magic Quadrant for Enterprise Content Management this year to avoid wrath.
One thing to remember is Gartner really doesn’t want you to compare a vendor’s location in the MQ from year to year. That is both well-advised and unrealistic. To be fair, as the measurements and industry change, scores change. Movement isn’t just dependent on vendor action, or inaction.
However, we are human and we like to perform comparisons. I have a copy to perform the comparison for my own interest. The link I had online to last year’s report is no longer valid, so you’ll have to take my Word on it.
James McGovern and Jesse Wilkins have recently been exchanging a few thoughts regarding Records Management. It has been an interesting discussion and it can be an educational read for those that are trying to learn more about Records Management. I thought I would look at what they had written and add my two cents.
Word of Pie 