« September 2005 | Main | November 2005 »

Michelle Grant is the Knowledge Manager at the Christchurch-based law firm Lane Neave. Lane Neave has been in business for over 120 years, and offers a range of specialist legal services. Michelle spoke yesterday at the October branch meeting of NZKM Christchurch, on the subject of selecting a document management system.
This is what I gleaned from listening to Michelle's experience ...
Key Decision Criteria
A cross-functional project team from Lane Neave was given the responsibility to evaluate and recommend a document management system for the firm. There are 5 people on the team, including a representative for the legal PAs, a lawyer, Michelle as the knowledge manager, and two others. An external consultant has also been involved, adding expert input and insight to the team.
The team developed a set of key decision and evaluation criteria, some of those being:
During Q&A, I asked about the need for offline / disconnected access to documents in the repository. Michelle said that this was not a priority, due to the availability of remote access for partners and lawyers while traveling.
Based on this list, the project team looked at 17 different document management systems, and completed an indepth review of 9. Products reviewed included Interwoven WorkSite (which has a huge footprint in the legal industry globally), Hummingbird Enterprise, SilentOne, idocs, DNA Dashboard, and Microsoft SharePoint Portal Server.
Michelle and her team standardized the pricing of each option for 60 users over a 5 year period, thereby including annual maintanence charges. Total five year cost ranged from NZ$25,000 (US$18,000) to NZ$170,000 (US$120,000).
Current Status
At the conclusion of the evaluation, and with a preferred solution in mind (at no point during the session yesterday did Michelle name the preferred solution), the team decided to delay making the decision for 6-12 months. This was driven by five factors:
Change the Culture Investments
In order to get Lane Neave people ready for the document management system, a number of cultural change investments have been made, such as agreeing on a consistent "house-style" for all Microsoft Word documents, the delivery of training every 2 weeks in house-style usage, and metadata enforcement. Michelle randomly assesses documents for compliance with the house-style, and awards such as lunch for two at Rosebank Estate Winery and Restaurant are dished out.
Some Ideas for Lane Neave
There were a number of complementary technologies that stood out as being of potential value at Lane Neave. I recommend that Michelle and her team should investigate:
What Do You Think?
Have you experienced a document management selection in recent months or years? How did your experience differ or align with Michelle's? I welcome your feedback through leaving a comment below, or by email.
I will be in San Francisco on Wednesday December 7. I am available to meet with collaboration technology vendors for a private consultation on market conditions and product strategy, or with an end-user organization on vendor and technology selection.
This will be the last time I'll be in the US for 2005, and won't be back until after July 2006 ... so if you have some pressing matters to discuss, please get in contact with me ASAP.

The Open Collaboration Forum is a meeting place for senior messaging and collaboration executives across the world, with a focus on improving business performance through open-source enterprise collaboration technologies. It has been chartered by Akiva Corp.
I will be presenting a Web seminar for the Forum on November 15, 2005 at 9am PST. My topic is Why Closed Doesn't Work for Collaborative Workspaces: Three Reasons Why Openness Is Required.
Email carries too much baggage for effective use as a team coordination and collaboration system. A better option is for team members to use a collaborative workspace, that is a pre-assembled collection of tools specifically designed for sharing of information about a project between team members. As great as the idea sounds, and for all the power of today's tools, adoption of collaborative workspaces in day-to-day work has been miniscule.It is my contention that "closedness" is preventing adoption, and that greater openness through interoperability is essential if the industry is to bring the benefits of collaborative workspaces to the masses. The plethora of very good, good, and not so good collaborative workspace products on the market are standalone, force people to learn multiple ways of interacting with others, and actually makes it more difficult to collaborate compared to email. This Web seminar outlines three reasons why today's approach doesn't work, and advocates three agreements that the industry needs to drive toward.
If you are able to attend, please complete the registration form.
I received an email from Jim Asiano earlier today, letting me know that Verosee for Skype was available for beta testing. Being rather overwhelmed at the moment, I decided to click on the link for a quick read, but got caught when I saw it had to do with "workspaces for Skype". And, well, stuff happened, and now you get to hear about it too.
What is Verosee
Here is how Verosee describes its offering:
Verosee extends Skype™ to provide free workspaces that automatically synchronize files and chats—with or without an Internet connection—and eradicate the disorganization inherent to exchanging email attachments and portable media. Verosee enables team members to be contextually aware of each other’s status and activities, bringing convergence throughout the project life cycle—before, during, and after meetings.
Installation Experience
My experience with installing Verosee on my Tecra M4 was:

Reaction
Here's my initial reaction:
Net-net: If you like testing new stuff, try it out. If you want to do real work immediately, work with other existing products.
What Do You Think?
Is this of interest to you? Are you going to try it out? Let me know by email, send me a Verosee invite, or leave a comment below.