Multi-Repository Information Governance in an Office 365 World June 11, 2014 Presented by: Mike Alsup, Gimmal USA

Company Overview From PLANNING Services to DEPLOYMENT of Gimmal Software and long-term SUPPORT Global ISV Headquartered in Houston TX. Founded in 2002

Today’s Agenda Challenge  Good Governance with Multiple Target ECM Repositories Focus  Technology and Platforms, not People or Process Perspective  SharePoint, Office 365 for Enterprise Information Management Alternative Governance Approaches Open Questions and the Art of the Possible in 2014 Introduction to Information Governance My Presentation Focus is on Technology and Platforms, not People or Process SharePoint Perspective on Enterprise Information Management Is “One Ring to Rule Them All” Realistic? Many Target ECM Repositories for Governance  Challenging! Alternative Governance Approaches Open Questions and the Art of the Possible in 2014

Scope – Target ECM Repositories SharePoint, Office 365 File Shares Traditional RM Email Cloud ECM Cloud File Sync & Share ERP Traditional ECM

Implementing Information Governance All content in all repositories managed from an information lifecycle perspective Dept.’s collaborate w/ IT, Records & Legal based on Doc Types and Process Rules Transparent User Participation  End reliance on users choosing to follow policy and rules 5 key parts of Information Governance Recommendations: Information Management Policy Information Lifecycle Metadata Inheritance Document Types (& Containers) Consistency and Simplicity in User Experience

Implementation of Information Management Policies Implementation requires three things: 1 What Categorization of information to know what was agreed for retention. 2 When Lifecycle state applied to information to determine when to act. Implementation requires two things, Categorization of information in order to know what was agreed for retention (the what) Organizations lack tools to consistently apply RM Policy across all repositories The most cost effective method to ensure proper categorization is to: Leverage an enterprise taxonomy with business rules, based on creator of the information and the business process Lifecycle state is applied to information to determine when to act (the when) Lifecycle model drives clean up & pushes information to more controlled state, based on location, value and security. The most cost effective method for timely deletion is a lifecycle state automatically starts and requires action to change destruction date prior to disposal Efficiency & compliance  policy implementation must be automated (the how) 3 How For efficiency & compliance, policy implementation must be automated

Proposed Information Lifecycle Hold Temporary In-Progress Final Archive Disposition (Destroy or Archive) All Information is managed from creation to disposition Retention for all information in every state of the ILC Early classification (indexing) is an important step to compliance Rules are enforced by the technology Retention Location Metadata Security Versions Disposition Many others XX Days Location(s) Network Shares E-mail Inbox Name XX Months Document Libraries Document Type Retention Schedule Repository of Record

Target ECM Repositories SharePoint Email File Shares OneDrive for Business Yammer Web Sites Traditional ECM (Open Text, IBM, EMC) Traditional RM (Physical) Cloud File Sharing (e.g., Box, Dropbox, OneDrive) Cloud ECM (e.g., SpringCM) Digital Archives Dave wants these to auto-build

Let’s Start with SharePoint Information Governance SharePoint Consolidating ECM &RM? 135MM SharePoint Licensed Users* 65,000 Companies* 67% = SharePoint to Enterprise* 700,000 SharePoint Developers* 50% of Gartner ECM inquiries 2013 = $2B business SharePoint is Energizing ECM and RM Microsoft owns productivity market ECM and RM a natural extension Many Best of Breed apps & extensions SharePoint is a compelling platform for information governance SharePoint

What Would SharePoint Governance Look Like? 1/26/2018 What Would SharePoint Governance Look Like? File Plan / Retention Schedule (Information Policies) Site Provisioning (Consistency) Content Types Information Policy Site Templates Document Templates (Consistency) Lifecycle Taxonomy SP Features XML Configuration Navigation Search Security File Plan Retention Schedule Information Policy Enforcement Record Center Term Store/ Content Hub Top Level Portal Team Sites My Sites Information Lifecycle

How to Apply Policy to Legacy SharePoint Sites? 1/26/2018 How to Apply Policy to Legacy SharePoint Sites? Top Site Portal

Legacy SharePoint Sites Archive the Site Close the Site (Read Only) Move the content to a new site (+ Items, etc.) Apply to policy to content in legacy site based on rules Enforce rules as site ages, include moves to Repository of Record Hopeless task without good, automated tools

SharePoint Item Retention Typical Governance Products Item Document Event Issue Announcement Link Contact Message Task Workflow History Post Comment Folder Typical Governance Products address 16% of content in SharePoint Collaboration >60% list content, no consensus on List Content Governance From a User Perspective: Every user (even novices) have unique uses for lists Lists replace Excel Spreadsheets and Access Databases Once created, lists contain valuable knowledge and information assets From an IT Perspective Items and List Content 95-100% structured data Sites persist because lists with valuable information exist perpetually Management is site-by-site, mainly manual Items cannot be easily managed in SharePoint Record Centers

What are your plans to leverage SharePoint/O365 in the Cloud? Majority still focused On-Premises & Hybrid Source: AIIM, “SharePoint: Clouding the Issues,” September 2013

Hybrid model is Needed for Governance Why is this important? Buyers expect Hybrid Content Governance for foreseeable future Long term Economics of Cloud Storage are not clear Office 365 is compelling “if our records stored in our data centers” Hybrid Governance requires simplifying assumptions

                    Office 365 Functionality Site Creation Content Type Hub Send-To Locations Records Center eDiscovery eDiscovery Site Client Development MySites (OneDrive for Business) SAP Integration (Duet) Cloud Development                    

Some Definitions… SharePoint-Hosted App: application made entirely of static files that reside directly in an instance of SharePoint. When an application is added to a site, SharePoint deploys the files to a specific domain where the App resides. Provider-hosted App: Provider-hosted apps for SharePoint include components that are deployed and hosted outside the SharePoint farm. They are installed to the host web, but their remote components are hosted on another server. Multi-tenancy: Multi-tenancy refers to the ability to manage and partition data of sites and otherwise shared services or software in order to accommodate multiple tenants. This is in contrast to running multiple instances of a service, or setting up separate hardware. In Microsoft products and technologies, multi-tenancy of services creates a hosting environment wherein server farm resources are maximized. CSOM: Client-side Object Model technology uses Javascript to interact with SharePoint 2013 sites and lists using the Microsoft Client-side assembly object model. Full Trust Applications: Traditional …

Hybrid Lifecycle Model SharePoint – On Premise “Send To” Record Centers Synch File Plan & Retention Schedule Service Policy Hub EDiscovery Search & Hold Service Two-way Lifecycle synch of records SharePoint Sites “Send To” “Send To” SharePoint Sites “Send To” SharePoint - Office 365 Record Centers

Enterprise Approach Summary SharePoint OOTB Enterprise Approach Summary Effort/Time Add-On Software Best Practices SDK Framework Team Sites & Governance Usability and Consistency Content Types & Metadata Libraries, Lists and Views File Templates Content Lifecycle Search Site Settings & Admin IM Policy Alignment Security In some cases, the software functionality overlaps with Framework functionality, and in some cases it is completely additive.

SharePoint / Office 365 Governance Summary SharePoint Content Types (=Document Types) are Essential On Premise vs. Office 365 vs. Hybrid SharePoint are different models Legacy Sites must be Included Lists & Items must be Included Hybrid must be Considered Extensive Planning is Required to Implement Hybrid Governance A Very Challenging Problem without any other Repositories! Requires Remote Control & Event Integration if done from outside

Alternative Information Governance Methods Repository-based Governance (Includes Containers) Access Controls Update Controls Disposition Controls (Deletion, Archiving, Offline Access) Repository Governance Issues: Is Policy Federated at the Repository-level or Document-level? Retention vs. Records Management Can Policy be Synchronized between Cloud & On-Premise Versions

Alternative Governance Methods Content Type-based Governance High Level Content Type Model Functional Content Type Model Lifecycle Governance Multi-Repository Governance In Place Governance Search & Classify-based Discovery Process Launched: Content Copied or Moved

Governance Available within Alternative ECM Repositories Governance Method Traditional ECM SharePoint / Office 365 Email File Shares Archival Systems Cloud File Sharing Container-based Governance Access Controls Update Controls Disposition Controls Strongest Strong, Disposition Controls, less than Traditional ECM Access/Update Strong, Policy-based Retention. 365 vs. On-Prem is different Access/ Update Strong, Limited Policy-based Retention Strong Container Governance, no Disposition Strong Access & Update, no RM Search Governance In Place (Search & Classify) Process (Search & Process) Copy or Move to Repository (Search & Harvest) Strongest, but only within ECM repository Strong, Needs Planning, Add-on Products for Enterprise-scale Content Governance Strong. Search & EDiscovery Options Available Strong, no actions allowed on Archived Content Limited Options, but Improving rapidly Document Type-based Governance High Level Document Types Functional Document Types Strong, but Needs Planning, Configuration & Change Mgmt. Strongest, Needs Planning, Configuration & Change Mgmt. N/A, Site Mailboxes enables Content Governance in SharePoint Not Natively Available Lifecycle Governance Multi-Repository Governance In Place Governance Strongest, but Needs Planning & Configuration Strongest, but Needs Planning & Add-on Products to Configure Limited Options for Configuration & Policy 23

Cloud & Collaboration have changed Information Governance Information Governance is challenged by Cloud ECM and Collaboration Tools Information policies  applied to more repositories Recognized need for governance to extend to all ECM repositories “One Ring to Rule Them All” from an information policy perspective  Policy Hub Service Applying information governance to multiple ECM repositories is competitive: ECM vendors (e.g. IBM, Open Text, EMC) Cloud file sharing vendors (e.g. Google, Box)  Need Ecosystem Partners Federation vendors (e.g. RSD, HP Autonomy) Microsoft SharePoint  Need Ecosystem Partners

Common Source of Information Policy: Policy Hub Service Rationale Office 365 Manage a Single Source of Information Policy across Multiple Repositories Enables Enforcement of Policy in all Document Repositories Several Options for Policy Management Social, File Sharing, Cloud ECM Content (e.g., Box) SharePoint Sites & Record Centers Policy Hub Service Web, Intranet, IM, Collaborative Content (e.g., Adobe) Email File Shares Digital Archive Traditional ECM On-site & Off-site Paper Storage

Alternative Policy Hub Service Owners Governance Method Traditional ECM SharePoint / Office 365 Federation Tools Cloud File Sharing Container-based Governance Access Controls Update Controls Disposition Controls Varies. Not many case studies of Federating Policy from Traditional ECM Strong. Disposition Controls less than Traditional ECM. Needs Add-on Products to Federate Policy Strong. Needs Connectors and Integration to Federate Policy. Extra Content Repository? Access & Update Controls Strong, Records Mgmt. is not natively available Search Governance In Place (Search and Classify) Process (Search and Process) Copy or Move to Repository (Search & Harvest) Strong, but Needs Planning, Connectors & Integration for other Repositories Strongest w/ SharePoint, Email & File Shares, Requires Planning, Add-on Products & Connectors for other Repositories Strong, Needs Planning, Connectors & Integration for all Repositories Not Natively Available Document Type-based Governance High Level Document Types Functional Document Types Strong, but Needs Planning, Connectors & Integration for other Repositories Strongest, but Needs Planning, Connectors & Integration for other Repositories Not Natively Available, needs Remote Control to dispose of content Lifecycle Governance Multi-Repository Governance In Place Governance Strong, but Needs Planning & Integration for other Repositories Planning & Integration for other Repositories Strong, but Needs Planning & Integration for other Repositories 26

Advantages & Disadvantages of a SharePoint/O365 Foundation for Policy Full integration with SharePoint/O365 Infrastructure Integrations with other Microsoft products Data and Documents stored in a single environment Transparent Content Governance simpler in a single environment SharePoint already owned  Solutions are much less expensive Disadvantages Content Governance, especially RM, is less mature in SharePoint Functionality Gaps in SharePoint/O365 RM solutions Availability of Expert SharePoint/O365 Implementation Skills Cost to convert to unified content governance in SharePoint/Office 365

The Future – Two Big Short Term Questions Does Unified Policy for SharePoint, Email & Share Drives = Content Governance? If Not, What Else? (Boxes, Paper, Structured Data, Drawings, Social, etc.) If Hybrid Content Governance is the future, how to do it?  Find Someone to help who has done it before  Make Sure they have Good Tools, Frameworks, and References Does Unified Policy for SharePoint, Email & Share Drive = Content Governance? This is the burning question for many organizations Including more ECM platforms in content governance is a bonus, but not core How to integrate these environments into a single, simpler enterprise solution? Office 365, Yammer & OneDrive for Business add to the urgency If Hybrid Content Governance is the future, how to do it? High priority architectural question in many organizations, especially the largest Clients are investing in cloud, but not storing records or even business critical content there How to integrate Cloud and on-premises ECM into a single, simpler enterprise solution?  Find Someone to help who has done it before  Make Sure they have Good Tools, Frameworks, and References

The Future The ECM Dial Tone Unified Object Environment (Document, Voice Message, Email, Viewer, etc.) Departments, Legal, Records and IT collaborate on Governance Policy at Document Type Level  Governance Policy Automatically Applied to Documents through Containers & Templates Much Planning and Setup  then, it just works Departmental ECM Solutions will go the way of: Word Processors  Word Microfilm  Storage Optical Disk  Storage Local Area Networks  Cable Plug or WiFi People don’t care about Technology, they want Solutions that Work How many Repositories for Unstructured Content do you Really Need? Simplify, Simplify, Simplify

? Questions

Contact Gimmal.com Mike Alsup mike.alsup@gimmal.com @gimmalgroup Thanks to everyone who came out, if you want to talk to Brad and I a bit more we’re always happy to set something up and dive into the details even further so don’t hesitate to email, or if you need to know more about Gimmal and our products and just can’t wait please head over to Gimmal.com. Again, thank you for listening today we really appreciate it and hopefully we’ll see you next week for another great Wednesday Webinar.