In SharePoint, where the heck do I fit in? ECM specialists in SharePoint

Posted on 2011/11/17 by markjowen

I’ve been very aware of something for awhile now…and that is “I don’t know where I fit in”. However, it wasn’t until recently when I read Nick Inglis’ blog post that I really came to realise that my “problem” is actually not an uncommon one.

In his post Nick comments that when he’s speaking at a SharePoint event, he often gets categorized under “Other“.

This is because (as he states) the SharePoint world doesn’t quite have a place for those who do work with SharePoint but in an ECM/ERM/Governance capacity.

The Salem Consulting Group have made a list of “plausible” SharePoint roles. I have listed them below, and have added a quick description in between parentheses. These include:

SharePoint Strategist (Complete business, and application knowledge. Has vision)
SharePoint Practice Lead (Subject Matter Expert with technical, consulting & strategic skills)
SharePoint Solutions Architect (Can translate Business requests into technical SharePoint solution)
SharePoint Technical Architect (senior) (Deepest technical understanding of SharePoint)
SharePoint Architect (Focused on the design, build, and configuration of the SharePoint platform and solution from a purely technical viewpoint)
SharePoint Infrastructure Architect (Responsible for designing and building multi-farm enterprise SharePoint architectures.)
SharePoint Search Architect (Familiar with taxonomies, folksonomies, etc. Can design & configure federated search solutions.)
SharePoint Information Architect (Has the knowledge/experience to design and build logical information frameworks)
SharePoint Farm Administrator (Manages the day to day administration of SharePoint.)
SharePoint Administrator (Looks after site collections, etc)
SharePoint Developer (A range of developer skills including .NET, C#, C++, Jquery and a wide range of other languages.)
Infopath and Workflow Designer/Administrator (Customer facing, and familiar with Infopath & Designer)
SharePoint User Interface Designer (Graphic designer for SharePoint who can create the user interface designs.)
SharePoint Business Analyst (Can interpret business requirements and offer a solution using the standard SharePoint services and features.)
SharePoint Programme/Project Manager (Project Management skills as well as fundamental technical understanding of SharePoint.)
SharePoint DBA (SQL) (Know how to manage the SharePoint SQL databases.)
Active Directory Administrator (Can set up the overarching security architecture).
SharePoint Workflow Specialist (For when using 3rd party tools for workflow.)
SharePoint BI Analyst/Architect/Administrator (Someone with specialist SharePoint BI skills include cube analysis etc etc)
SharePoint Integrator (Able to integrate SharePoint with other systems -SAP, Documentum, etc.)
SharePoint Mobile Specialist (Deep knowledge of Groove (2007) and SharePoint workspaces (2010) including the management and relay servers.)
SharePoint Trainer/Instructor
SharePoint User Adoption Specialist (Involved with the strategies of how to get the users to use the SharePoint solutions).

(Note – The original post (authored by Ian McNeice) from Salem offers a more detailed description of these roles. The link is at the end of this post.

In Nick’s post, he describes an “Information Professional“.

These are the people that have been busy developing models of governance … and have been driving forward the conversation about how SharePoint can be used as a “proper” ECM (and yes, maybe even ERM) system.

Looking at Ian’s list, I think the closest role that matches this is the “Information Architect”. This is the person who insists on maintaining a correct classifications, taxonomies, etc while has expertise in document management, version control techniques, data retention polices, publication and archiving practices.

Being prompted by Nick’s post, and then looking through Ian’s post has certainly help me better “label” myself.

Prior to this, even though I have worked in the Document Management field for over 10 years, I could never find a way of describing my skill set to a “SharePointy” (is that what you call a SharePoint fan?). I can set up, and administer SharePoint sites. I can design user interfaces. I can set up farms, as well as write kick-ass documentation. But I could do more than that.

Thanks to Nick and Ian, I’m going to go and update my LinkedIn profile.

Excellent References

Nick’s Post “Excluding the Information Professional in SharePoint“
Ian’s Post “The Key Skill Roles of SharePoint“

(Social) Networking

Posted on 2011/11/14 by markjowen

Recently I read a post that resonated with me.

It was written by Charles Blakeman, and he questioned what was so special about social networking.

With his permission I have included his blog post below…

When we use the phrase Social Networking, do we really get it?

I’m not at all opposed to online networking – I use it all the time to build relationships, but no matter what medium you use to connect with people, it’s not about CONTACTS, but meaningful and lasting CONNECTIONS. It’s ALWAYS about being social. So maybe I don’t get it.

“Social networking” is the apparent standard description of online networking. But how is it that “social networking” is somehow just an online thing? I get business from my neighbors, my family, my bicycling friends, my golf friends, my business friends, my clients, and from people I meet in a restaurant, as well as from people on Twitter and Facebook.

“SOCIAL” networking is a great idea, in fact it’s the only way to network, by being social, not salesy – making friends and meeting needs. But most people who do offline or online networking aren’t social about it at all. Most networking opportunities are simply a place to collect business cards and try to sell things to people, which is why most serious business people with a true network and lasting connections don’t show up at networking events.

They’re too business doing real social networking – playing golf with a friend, hosting a small and intimate wine tasting at their house, having a cup of coffee with a few business associates, riding a bike with a half dozen others, or meeting with their very committed referral network. And in all this, their objective is to serve people and meet THEIR needs, which is the opposite of most classic networking strategies.

When truly social business people move online, they have no interest in networking, but in building a network, and they don’t focus on contacts, but on lasting connections. Twitter and Facebook look the same to them as a cup of coffee with a few friends – they’re focused on trying to serve others and see how they can push them forward, not on selling things to everyone that says hello.

So I’m confused. If “social networking” is something you do online, then what is connecting a friend with a potential employee for her, or meeting someone over a cup of coffee – is that “unsocial networking”?

The communications medium is not the magic. The willingness to serve other people where they are at, not where I want them to be, and to get them to their goals are the keys to the business kingdom. No matter what the medium, I will get farther by serving people than selling to them.

I can’t bring myself to call either online or offline networking “social networking” because it implies there are types of good networking that aren’t social. If people don’t like me, they won’t buy from me. What part of building a network SHOULDN’T be social? Maybe I just don’t get it.

More of Charles excellent posts can be read on the businessblogs site here

Social Networking: Why? (ritcyberselfdefense.wordpress.com)

Social Media in Business

Posted on 2011/07/12 by markjowen

“Life is social.” … “Business is social. People buy from people they like and they like people who know them. When we meet someone in their office we look at pictures on their wall so we can share something in common. We want to build intimacy and trust. Social media is just an electronic way to listen and engage…extending the old school way of going to someone’s office.”

The above is a quote from a Forbes article (by Gene Marks) that I recently read. The article was discussing the adoption of social media in business.

While it seems that there is certainly a lot of interest in using social media in a business sense, there just hasn’t been that “compelling reason” to adopt it without question.

However there are still those that seem to see a real benefit (as seen in the quote above”, there are still a lot of people who don’t.

From what I’ve seen, business is still being run by a generation that hasn’t grown up with the web2.0 “idea”. And…there still isn’t a real business use that makes “C” level staff decide to implement it, without trying to work out first what they are going to use it for. (For some ideas on this, check out one of my earlier posts “ESS (Enterprise Social Software) – user adoption“)

Here’s the link to Gene’s post: Am I Wasting My Time On Social Media?

My Social Media posts
3 Critical Twitter Tools for Your Social Media Strategy (techattitude.com)
Social Media: Making it Work for You (catherinescareercorner.com)
Wanted: A social media expert?! (youthhealth20.com)
Five Fundamentals of a Social Media Strategy (case.typepad.com)

Klout me!

Posted on 2011/01/11 by markjowen

I checked out my Klout score today.

Even though, I’ve been aware of Klout through my use of Hootsuite, I’ve never been to the actual site.

Upon arriving on the Klout site, I was prompted to enter the name of a tweeter. So I entered mine. Within seconds I got my Klout score. It was 11. And I am classified as an Explorer. As well as this there was a further explanation:

Mark Owen is an Explorer

You actively engage in the social web, constantly trying out new ways to interact and network. You’re exploring the ecosystem and making it work for you. Your level of activity and engagement shows that you “get it”, we predict you’ll be moving up.”

Ok – I knew that I was not really a big fish in the Twitter pond yet. So I wanted to learn more. I clicked on the Score Analysis tab and was presented with information about my score. Suddenly felt like I was a socially awkward 14 year old again, and reading my school report:

“Mark Owen needs to engage more with others or be more active to gain influence.”

“Mark Owen has the ability to generate actions and discussions”

“Mark Owen does not engage with very many influencers”

Here’s my score when this blog was written:

And here’s the link to the Klout site where you can read all the gory details over my score.

Now – what struck me as a bit annoying is that the Klout site states:

“The Klout Score is the measurement of your overall online influence.”

This seems to be based only on Twitter activity.

At least, if you read all the “Learn More” sections on the Klout site, there is no mention of anything else.

It is possible to include your Facebook activity into the mix, and Klout have raised $8.5 million to “take Klout to the next level” where they want to include more streams (LinkedIn etc), but until that happens, they should tell it like it is.

That is, the Klout score measures the influence someone has on Twitter! Even if they do include LinkedIn and Facebook, what about the influence that arises from blog posts, or comments on other people’s site. What about other social media avenues?

At the same time, not all influencers tweet regularly (in fact, I read a 2009 report by Baracuda Labs indicates that 73% of users have less than 10 tweets).

In fact, Matt Owen (no relation) did a very interesting “experiment” to test whether Klout was returning meaningful results. I definitely reccommend checking it out (link listed below).

Have a look at the links I have listed below, and let me know what you think – Is Klout a useful tool?

Relevant Links: