MarketIQ

Intelligence Quarterly Q4 2008 Market insights based on the opinions and experiences of 198 AIIM members and industry associates

Content Creation and Delivery
The On-Ramps and Off-Ramps of ECM

Underwritten in part by:

Send to a friend >

MarketIQ
Intelligence Quarterly

About the Research
As the non-profit association dedicated to nurturing, growing and supporting the ECM (Enterprise Content Management) community, AIIM is proud to provide this research at no charge. In this way, the education, thought leadership and direction provided by our work can be leveraged by the entire community. Please feel free to share this document with a friend or colleague. Our ability to deliver such high-quality research is partially made possible by our underwriting companies, without whom we would have to return to a paid subscription model. For that, we hope you will join us in thanking our underwriters, which include:

Mark Logic 999 Skyway Road, Suite 200 San Carlos, CA 94070 Tel: 650-655 2300 sales@marklogic.com www.marklogic.com

Process Used and Survey Demographics
While we appreciate the support of these sponsors, we also greatly value our objectivity and independence as a trade association. The results of the survey and the market commentary made in this report are independent of any bias from the vendor community. AIIM used two main sources to construct this report. The first was the accumulated experience and ongoing market analysis work performed by Carl Frappaolo. The second was a survey administered by Frappaolo and taken by 198 individual AIIM members between November 17 and November 29, 2008. Survey population demographics can be found in Appendix A.

About AIIM
AIIM (www.aiim.org) is the community that provides education, research, and best practices to help organizations find, control and optimize their information. For more than 60 years, AIIM has been the leading non-profit organization focused on helping users understand the challenges associated with managing documents, content, records and business processes. Today, AIIM is international in scope, independent and implementation-focused, acting as the intermediary between ECM (Enterprise Content Management) users, vendors, and the channel. © 2008 AIIM—The ECM Association 1100 Wayne Avenue, Suite 1100 Silver Spring, MD 20910 301.587.8202 www.aiim.org

About the Author
Carl Frappaolo is a co-founder and principal of Information Architected. He has more than 25 years of experience working with a broad array of business solutions, including knowledge and content management, portals, search engines, document management, workflow, business process management (BPM), records management, imaging, intranets, electronic document databases and sourcing strategy. Mr. Frappaolo is well-versed in the practical business and technical aspects of implementing large-scale e-applications. Prior to forming Information Architected, Mr. Frappaolo was Vice President and founder of the Market Intelligence unit of AIIM International (2007-2008). He was also the founder of Delphi Group (1988-2004). Mr. Frappaolo has been recognized by AIIM as a Master of Information Technology and as an Information Systems Laureate, and in 2000, was bestowed the Distinguished Service Award by AIIM. He is the author of four books. His professional blog can be found at www.TakingAIIM.com

2

Table of Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Figure 1. The AIIM ECM Lifecycle Component Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

MarketIQ
Content Creation and Delivery
3

On-Ramps: Content Remains Fairly the Same—But Change is on the Horizon . . . . . . . . 5
Content Formats: Change is slow in coming, but change is afoot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Figure 2. Currently, what content formats are used in your organization for long-term storage and creation of content? . . . . . . . . . 6 Figure 3. What content formats do you think will be used in your organization for long-term storage and creation of content in the next five years? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Adoption of Rich New Content Driven by Consumer Demand and Need to Communicate More Effectively . . . . . . . . . . 8
Figure 4. Why did your organization embrace multimedia content? (E.g. audio, video, photos, scent, touch) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Figure 5. Why doesn’t your organization use multimedia content? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Content Creation Based in Simpler Traditional Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Figure 6. For content created within your firewall, what content capture/authoring devices or approaches are used in your organization? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Figure 7. For content submitted by third parties (partners, customers) what content capture/authoring approaches are used in your organization? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Figure 8. What percentage of the content that you scan do you convert to editable text using OCR technology? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

ECM Off-Ramps: Delivery Predominately Still not “Special” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Figure 9. To what extent is content re-purposed/re-combined in your organization to create new (custom or personalized) forms of output?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Figure 10. What types of re-purposing of content does your organization engage in?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Lack of Strategy Keeps Content Delivery in “Dated” Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Figure 11. What formal approaches to content structuring and re-purposing are used in your organization? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Figure 12. How would you best describe the level of integration between your organization’s content authoring processes and your Enterprise Content Management System? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Figure 13. How would you characterize your organization’s strategy for coordinating content capture/authoring and distribution/publishing? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Benefits Mis-Targeted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Figure 14. What benefits do you hope to achieve by re-purposing content? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Figure 15. What type of publishing formats are used by your organization? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

The State of the Market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Traditional Approaches Leads to Traditional Partnering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Figure 16. Is content distributing/publishing outsourced to any degree by your organization?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Figure 17. Why do you outsource some or all of your organization’s content publishing/distribution? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Figure 18. Why doesn’t your organization outsource its content distribution/publishing?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

The State of the Adoption Lifecycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Figure 19. Where do you feel overall INDUSTRY (market) adoption is with regards to the following? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Figure 20. Where do you feel YOUR ORGANIZATION adoption is with regards to the following?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Survey Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Figure 21. How Many Employees Are in Your Organization?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Figure 22. Which Vertical Industry Do You Work In? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Figure 23. What Is Your Role in Your Organization?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Figure 24. In Which Geographic Region Are You Located? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Introduction
A popular AIIM graphic depicts Enterprise Content Management (ECM) as a series of different connected stages, each associated with a family of related technologies (See Figure 1.) A great deal of attention is often paid to the middle component of this model—management. Indeed, it is the only stage that is directly reflected in the acronym “ECM” (Enterprise Content Management). Despite the importance of management, the front-end functionality—content capture—is fundamentally critical to any ECM system. Content capture is any tool, technique or technology that enables the digitization of content so that it can be managed in an ECM. The adage GIGO (garbage in – garbage out) is as true today as it was in the 1960s. If we cannot accurately and effectively capture content, the value of managing it is rendered moot. More importantly, the scope of any ECM system will be defined by the capture stage. In the end, the richness and value of any ECM application is grounded in the content it takes in. But while the ability to create content is expanding, so is the ability to deliver it. Digital content is not only rich in format, but also highly flexible, capable of being presented in myriad interfaces and combinations, at a fraction of the cost of doing so in an analog world. For example, it is highly likely that you have received a form letter that was personalized, giving the appearance of one-to-one personal communication. This simple mail-merge functionality is the tip of the
Figure 1 . The AIIM ECM Lifecycle Component Model

iceberg concerning powerful new ways to publish and distribute content in the digital age. Today, mashups provide simple ways to merge images, videos and text in a single user interface, and XMLformatted content is recombined, at the touch of a button, to render everything from training manuals to purchase agreements in a highly personalized and customized presentation. RFID (radio frequency identification)-enabled “coupons” can be dynamically updated when their owners are within a certain proximity to a retail store. “Smart badges” are now used in some conferences. Along with the name of its wearer, the badge dynamically displays content (facts and statements) that link two people together as they approach one another at the conference. To be sure, the management portion of ECM is extremely important, since it governs content integrity and security. But some of the most exciting changes ushered in by ECM have and will be brought about by information capture—expanding the type of content within the ECM—and delivery—radically altering the way content is published and redistributed. We are calling capture and delivery the “On-Ramps and OffRamps of ECM.” There is no debating that content management capabilities offer great benefit to the enterprise; the potential upside from orchestrated and coordinated efforts to create and distribute digital content is nothing short of revolutionary. But how far is the market from realizing this promise? That is the focus of this Market IQ.

4

MarketIQ
Content Creation and Delivery

Section 1

On-Ramps:
Content Remains Fairly the Same—But Change is on the Horizon
The scope of online content was significantly expanded upon the advent of imaging and word processing. Once the exclusive domain of data (i.e., structured fields of numbers and characters), word processing and imaging systems introduced unstructured files containing free-flowing text, graphics and pictures. This was the impetus for electronic document management systems, which evolved into today’s more advanced ECM systems. And once the foundation to storing unstructured content in digital form was introduced, the doors were open to the challenge and realization of capturing virtually any form of information. Although it took years for many organizations to fully appreciate the underlying potential of storing word processing files and images in digital form, technically, the stage was set. Binary large objects (BLOBs) provided the foundation to a content-agnostic architecture, one that would accept and manage any form of digital content. Looking to the Internet today, we witness a plethora of rich content types. Animated graphics are ubiquitous across Web sites. Audio and video files abound. Statistics from YouTube show that as of late 2008, 13 hours of video are uploaded every minute. But as AIIM reported in its Market IQ on Findability, in many cases, the stateof-the-industry on the commercial Web is greatly outpacing the state-of-the-industry on corporate intranets. Indeed, while content capture has advanced significantly on the Internet, survey responses indicate a very different story inside the firewall – albeit one with some surprises and signs of progress.

Content Formats: Change is slow in coming, but change is afoot
Not unexpectedly, paper is still universally used across all of the organizations we polled. PDF, both as output from a scanned image and as output (print) from online files remains prevalent, with these formats being used in 90% and 87% of the organizations, respectively. Although a relatively new file format, PDF can be thought of as an “image file,” and therefore does not represent a radical departure from scanning/imaging technology. Similarly, e-mail (used by nearly 90% of survey respondents as a content capture and storage format) and native online files (used by nearly 88% of survey respondents as a content capture and storage format) have been added to the “popular” mix of content types created and captured, but do not represent a major step forward either. Meanwhile, legacy formats persist—microfilm/fiche is still used in 43% of the organizations polled.
5

But, with all of that said, there is indication of change, albeit nascent. Survey respondents indicated that digital photos are used by 53% of the organizations, while digital video and audio are used by 34% and 30%, respectively. (See Figure 2) Indeed, when asked what content formats they believed their organizations will be using in the next five years, there was evidence of planned migration to more rich media types. Survey respondents indicated a belief that PDF output from online files, PDF from scanned images, e-mail and native file formats would eclipse paper as the most universally used forms of captured content. Multimedia formats, such as photos, audio and video, are expected to make modest gains, as well as the next-generation digital smell and touch formats. Survey respondents foresee that enterprises in the next five years still predominately using more traditional forms of content (including film and fiche) but building momentum for and adoption of newer forms of content. At many organizations, audio, video and interactive media may still seem like the future, but the future is within sight. (See Figure 3)
Figure 2 . Currently, what content formats are used in your organization for long-term storage and creation of content?Currently, what content formats are used in your organization for long-term storage and creation of content?
Paper PDF (Scanned from paper) E-mail Native online files (e.g., MS Office files) PDF (output from online files) Images HTML formatted content Digital photos XML formatted content Film/fiche Digital video Digital audio Other Digital smell (olfactory) Digital touch
0% 100%

90%

90%

89%

87%

82%

60%

53%

47%

43%

34%

30%

18%

1%

1% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

6

Figure 3 . What content formats do you think will be used in your organization for long-term storage and creation of content in the next five years?
PDF (output from online files) PDF (Scanned from paper) E-mail Native online files (e.g., MS Office files) Paper Images XML formatted content HTML formatted content Digital photos Digital video Digital audio Film/fiche Other Digital touch Digital smell (olfactory)
0% 93%

What content formats do you think will be used in your organization for long-term storage and creation of content in the next 5 years?

MarketIQ

88%

87%

Content Creation and Delivery

81%

77%

72%

64%

59%

54%

47%

Section 1 On-Ramps: Content Remains Fairly the Same—But Change Is on the Horizon

37%

28%

20%

5%

2% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

7

Adoption of Rich New Content Driven by Consumer Demand and Need to Communicate More Effectively
When survey respondents were asked to identify why their organizations have embraced multimedia content, there was no single compelling reason (See Figure 4.) “More effective communication” and “customer demand” are identified the most often, at 43% and 32% respectively. The latter is a good example of how the expectations set by the commercial Web are driving demands for business interfaces. As stated earlier, the common use of video, audio and interactive media on the Internet is raising user expectations, creating a demand for similar content within businesses. As customers demand greater use of rich media, it is fair to assume that in responding businesses become more familiar with the powers of the new media types and deploy them not just in customer-facing sites, but also within the firewall, as a way to better communicate with employees.
Figure 4 . Why did your organization embrace multimedia content? (E .g . audio, video, photos, scent, touch)
Why did your organization embrace multimedia content? (e.g. audio, video, photos, scent, touch)
43%

More effective communication Customer demand Ease of consumption Competitive advantage Cost-savings Market perception Just seemed like the right thing to do Cost-benefit ratio determined Just experimenting Do not Know
0% 6% 9% 17% 23% 32%

21%

16%

13%

7% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

But one of the more powerful and surprising findings of the survey was the fact that when asked why their organization had not yet embraced multimedia content, the number-one response (91%) was simply, “Haven’t gotten around to it yet, but likely will.” Compare that to the 9% who indicated “Haven’t gotten around to it yet, and likely will not.” This indicates strongly that rich media will gain wider use within businesses, and soon. Again, the finding is likely tied to customer demand for such content, as well as the realization of rich media’s basic benefits, which include more effective communication. Cost was the third most popularly cited reason why multimedia had not yet been adopted (second only to “Don’t Know”). It is likely that this concern, along with the worry that there are “no perceived benefits that outweigh costs” (cited by 44% of survey respondents), will drop in prominence as the cost of media and storage drops and the adoption of multimedia becomes “just a cost of doing business.” As multimedia/rich media technology matures, it is also likely that the less frequently cited obstacles—integration with existing systems (44%), bandwidth (42%), lack of expertise (31%) and technology immaturity (27%)—will also drop in prominence or disappear. It is interesting to note that technology immaturity ranked as low as it did, but perhaps not surprising, given the level of rich content available on the Internet today. (See Figure 5.)

8

Figure 5 . Why doesn’t your organization use multimediaorganization use multimedia content? Why doesnt your content?
Haven’t gotten around to it yet, but likely will Cost concerns Integration with existing systems No perceived benefit that outweighs costs Support/bandwidth Lack of expertise in technology Technology immaturity No perceived benefit Storage overhead Haven’t gotten around to it yet, and likely will not Scalability concerns Don’t know
0% 10% 20% 9% 16% 31% 44% 56% 91%

MarketIQ

44%

Content Creation and Delivery

42%

27%

27%

7%

Section 1 On-Ramps: Content Remains Fairly the Same—But Change Is on the Horizon

58% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Content Creation Based in Simpler Traditional Models
Reflecting the survey responses discussed so far, the majority of organizations indicated that within the firewall, content authoring/capturing is still predominately done using more traditional tools such as word processing applications in (87%) and scanning (77%). Meanwhile, Enterprise 2.0 technologies such as Wikis are used in only 17% of the surveyed organizations. Video, immensely popular on the Internet, is used in just 15%. The use of XML, either authored natively or via a conversion utility, is relatively low, with use in 22% and 30% of the organizations, respectively (See Figure 6). The last finding is most interesting, since XML and formats like it are fundamental to many of the more forward-looking content delivery technologies. We also asked which content capture/authoring devices or approaches were used for content that originates outside the firewall, where the level of control is potentially less. Once again, “native office documents” was the number one answer, albeit to a lesser degree (87%). It is encouraging to see how much these file forms (i.e. native office documents), are being shared, especially when compared to the number-two answer, scanning (77%). It was not too long ago that inter-organization document exchange routinely involved printing word processing files, shipping the paper from one site to another, at which point the paper was scanned. It is likely that in most of these organizations, these two popularly utilized techniques (i.e. native file formats and scanning) are used in tandem, the former in cases where the third party can cooperate in providing native files, and the latter where it cannot or will not, and provides paper input. (As mentioned earlier, however, respondents largely intend to decrease their use of paper in coming years.) But scanning will likely remain a key means of content capture, especially for content created outside the enterprise. Consider, for example, that the advent of electronic filing (e-filing) of taxes began in 1992. This year, the IRS expected about 60% of tax returns to be filed electronically. Nonetheless, that meant that for the 2008 filing season, the IRS was still expecting approximately 52 million paper returns (Source: “Interim Results of the 2008 Filing Season” TREASURY INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR TAX ADMINISTRATION, Reference Number: 2008-40-100).

9

Yes, we are embracing new technologies and migrating to online content, but in the process, we are still creating a fair amount of paper. The 52 million Americans that continue to use paper to file their taxes represent a very real and large need for scanning technologies. What is surprising is the degree to which the manual reentering of content is used as a capture device. It came in third with 54% of responses. Legacy habits die hard—indeed, fax capture was cited by 42%. The remaining options were not cited to any significant level. (See Figure 7). We also asked how often scanned content is converted to editable text using OCR (optical character recognition), a technique that allows scanned content to be manipulated and delivered in creative ways. So far, OCR is not being widely adopted. Thirty-six percent of respondents indicated that it is not used at all, with another 31% indicating it is used on only ten percent or less of the content scanned. (See figure 8.) This seems to support earlier observations that in many organizations, the value of flexible forms of content does not outweigh the perceived cost of creating it. As we will examine later in this Market IQ, this is likely because in most organizations, content capture strategies are not aligned with content delivery strategies. Often, the value from XML content, “OCRed” content and perhaps even multimedia content is not realized during the capture or management stages of ECM. The benefits become clear only in the delivery stages.
Figure 6 . For content created within your firewall, what content capture/authoring devices or approaches are used in yourcontent created within your firewall what content capture/authoring devices or approaches are used in your organization? For organization?
XML conversion
30%

Native XML authoring

22%

Word Processing

87%

Live video capture

15%

Scanning

77%

Digital photography

37%

Wikis

17%

Content databases (replicate and syndicate)

51%

E-forms
0% 10%

45% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

10

Figure 7 . For content submitted by third parties (partners, customers) what content capture/authoring approaches content submitted by third parties (partners, customers) what content capture/authoring approaches are used in your organization For are used in your organization?

MarketIQ

Manual re-entry XML conversion Native XML authoring Office documents Live video capture Scanning Digital photography Wikis Content databases (replicate and syndicate) E-forms (simple) “Smart” forms Fax Video/audio
0%

54%

18%

9%

Content Creation and Delivery

68%

4%

61%

19%

4%

29%

33%

Section 1 On-Ramps: Content Remains Fairly the Same—But Change Is on the Horizon

12%

42%

13% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Figure 8 . What percentage of the content that you scan do you convert to editable text using OCR technology?
None 1 - 10 11 - 25 26 - 50 51 - 75 76 - 99 100
0% 3% 10% 20% 30% 6% 9% 31% 36%

What percentage of the content that you scan do you convert to editable text using OCR technology?

9%

7%

40%

11

Section 2

ECM Off-Ramps:
Delivery Predominately Still not “Special”
The focus of this Market IQ now turns to the final stage of ECM – delivery (albeit from a management perspective, the final stage would arguably be “archive.”) Our findings show that while companies are adopting new approaches to creating and capturing content, they have not been as quick to adopt innovative delivery and publishing methods. When asked the degree to which content is repurposed, 45% of survey respondents indicated it “minimally” or “not at all.” Another 28% indicated that content was only “somewhat” repurposed (See Figure 9). Just as important, and perhaps reflective of this, survey respondents indicated that any repurposing which is going on is fairly elementary. (See Figure 10.)

Figure 9 . To what extent is content re-purposed/re-combined in your organization to create new (custom or personalized) forms of output? To what extent is content re-purposed/re-combined in your organization to create new (custom or personalized) forms of output?
Not at All Minimally Somewhat Extensively I do not know
0% 13% 14% 10% 20% 30% 40% 28% 7% 38%

12

Simple fielded data (e.g. names, title) merger in text Customized/personalized batch content (e.g statements or standard letters) On-demand content (e.g. ad-hoc customer correspondence)

44%

36%

32%

Figure little personalization 24% Structured mass-production content with10 . What types of re-purposing of content does your organization engage in?

MarketIQ

Dynamically generated agreements and/or policies Highly customized interactive content (e.g. contracts) Dynamically generated product information Dynamically generated brochures Customized catalogs or technical manuals Other 3D-modeling

23%

17%

13%

Content Creation and Delivery

13%

13%

8%

3% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Lack of Strategy Keeps Content Delivery in “Dated” Models
So while there is some momentum in the adoption of new forms of rich media content, the strategic repurposing of that content is not keeping pace. The lack of creative content delivery techniques in brochures, agreements, catalogues and manuals represents a hugely untapped potential. As introduced at the beginning of this Market IQ, content delivery has evolved and can be deployed in highly personalized, real-time presentations. Of course, the value of personalized content has not escaped all organizations. Good speechwriters have been doing this for years, albeit in analog format. The same topic is discussed three different ways, so as to resonate with three very different audiences. The facts remain basically the same, but the lexicon, examples used, and topics stressed differ from audience to audience. Good salespeople have long repurposed content as well. Armed with knowledge about an entire inventory of products and sales goals, the effective salesperson carefully relates “key” pieces of content to help drive desired customer decisions. Many Web-based product catalogues now do this. A simple example is the model made popular by Amazon.com, in which a listing of “suggested additional purchases,” is based on many factors, providing a customized list for each shopper. Organizations today can use those techniques and others to become more effective in communication, but are simply not using them. (See Figure 11.) But getting there takes more than technology. It requires an overall ECM strategy that aligns content capture, manipulation and delivery with specific business goals. Unfortunately, our survey indicates that most organizations don’t have one in place. (See Figures 12 and 13.) Section 2 ECM Off-Ramps: Delivery Predominantly Still not “Special”
13

Figure 11 . What formal approaches to content structuring and re-purposing are used in your organization? Figure 12 . How would you best describe the level of integration between your organization’s content 17% XML databases authoring processes and your Enterprise Content Management System? Figure 13 . How would you characterize your organization’s strategy for coordinating content capture/ authoring and distribution/publishing?
HTML
25%

What formal approaches to content structuring and re-purposing are used in your organization?

XML-based publishing

16%

Benefits Mis-Targeted
DITA DocBook

The lack of mature ECM strategies among respondents seems tied to a fundamental disconnect between the perceived benefits of re-purposing content and their desire to embrace rich content.
4%

3%

When asked what benefits were targeted for repurposing content, the number-one response was “reduced 19% Information Mapping costs.” But recall that the primary driver behind adoption of multimedia, discussed earlier in this report, was “increased customer demand.” These are two potentially opposing goals. Again, the real value of creative con35% Internally developed templates more effectively communicate in highly customized formats. It is most encouraging tent delivery is its ability to to note that “More effective communication”, ranked second (51%), but “Increased customer satisfaction” was 10% Other only cited by 42% of respondents.
27% Don’t Know More advanced and competitive uses such as “More effective market messaging”, and “Ease of consumption”, only were used In 23% and 32% of organizations, respectively. Market perception was only viewed by 7% of respondents as a benefit of re-purposing content. 15% None 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

It was encouraging to see that only 6% felt they were just experimenting with content re-purposing.

On the other hand, a similarly small amount, 8%, were doing it because it “just seems like the right thing to do,” and attitude that reflects the evolution of a technique into standard business practice (See Figure 14.)
Figure 14 . What benefits do you hope to achieve by re-purposing content?
Reduced costs More effective communication Tighter control of content Increased customer satisfaction Ease of consumption Competitive advantage More effective market messaging Do not Know Just seems like the right thing to do Market perception Just experimenting
0% 11% 26% 32% 45% 51% 57%

What benefits do you hope to achieve by re-purposing content?

42%

23%

8%

7%

6% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

14

Given these findings, it is not surprising that most of the surveyed organizations are not using creative formats for content publishing, relying instead on traditional formats such as E-mail, PDF, static static Web pages and printed output. (See Figure 15.)
Figure 15 . What type of publishing formats are used by your organization?
Print output via service bureau Print output (internal) Images for archiving (e.g. PDF or TIFF) Static web pages Customized/personalized web pages/PURLs 3D modeling Streaming Video/audio Interactive web pages E-mail (HTML) E-mail (text only) SMS / text messages Automated voice mail / VoiceML XML output / industry standard XML (e.g. XSL-FO, ACORD OR FpML) Wikis Blogs RSS feeds Widgets/portlets Other
0% 21% 73% 11% 26% 22%

MarketIQ

What type of publishing formats are used by your organization?

Content Creation and Delivery

83%

81%

79%

31%

50%

84%

Section 2 ECM Off-Ramps: Delivery Predominantly Still not “Special”

34%

30%

25%

25%

25%

18%

13% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

15

Section 3

The State of the Market
This Market IQ concludes with an assessment of today’s ECM deployment models, market maturity and organizational maturity. We began with the assertion that many of the technologies and techniques behind today’s cutting-edge content capture and delivery models have been available for quite some time. But as the survey results have shown, adoption, while gaining momentum, can best be characterized as slow and steady.

Traditional Approaches Leads to Traditional Partnering
We looked at the degree to which respondents are using outsourcing services to deliver content. More than half (64%) indicated their organizations had not outsourced any content distribution or publishing needs. (See Figure 16.) It is telling that among those that have outsourced some or part of their content delivery, the popular reasons for doing so were cost savings and speed of delivery. Less than half (47%) cited a desire to leverage the content delivery-specific expertise of third parties -- i.e. to more aggressively use electronic content in competitive and dynamic new ways (See Figure 17.) Among those that have not outsourced any content delivery, the number-one reason why was “loss of control” (See Figure 18.) These security-related fears are likely founded in older attitudes regarding content in general (which are also responsible for mundane approaches to re-purposing content), and content security in particular. (For more detail regarding the state of the market on Content Security, see the AIIM Market IQ on Content Security.)

16

Is content distributing/publishing outsourced to any degree by Figure 16 . Is content distributing/publishing outsourced to any degree by your organization? your organization?

MarketIQ

64%

Content Creation and Delivery

36%

No

Yes

Figure you outsourceyou outsource some or all of your organization’s content publishing/distribution? 17 . Why do some or all of your organization’s content publishing/distribution? Why do
Leverage the expertise of 3rd parties Cost reduction Speed of production I do not know
0% 18% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 47%

51%

Section 3 State of the Market

50%

Figure 18 . Why doesn’t your organization outsource its content distribution/publishing?
Why doesn’t your organization outsource its content distribution/publishing?
31%

Cost Loss of control Inflexible models I do not know
0% 10% 16%

53%

28% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

The State of the Adoption Lifecycle
Survey respondents largely believe that the technologies and concepts associated with content capture and delivery are either “straddling the chasm” or have just crossed (A finding reflective of “pre-Chasm” technology from Geoffrey Moore’s “Crossing the Chasm” terminology). Most organizations are therefore relying on more traditional approaches, with cutting-edge concepts such as digital smell and digital touch earning simply a “don’t know” from the majority of survey respondents. Older technologies such as scanning are well past crossing the chasm. Audio and video seem to be “just across,” perhaps indicative of their prevalence on the commercial Web. Finally, overall, most respondents view overall market adoption of these technologies and techniques as being ahead of their own organization.

17

This occurred in past research where the Moore Chasm model was applied, such as the AIIM Market IQ on Content Security and the AIIM Market IQ on Findability, and could partially attributed to a “grass is always greener” mentality. It is more likely, however, that this difference in opinion is also based on the gaps between content capture and delivery capability exhibited on the commercial Web, versus corporate intranets. (See Figures 19 and 20.)
Figure 19 . Where do youdo youoverall INDUSTRY (market) adoption is is with regards to the following? Where feel feel overall INDUSTRY (market) adoption with regards to the following?
70%

60%

50%

XML-based publishing Customized Content delivery Scanning/Capture E-mail capture Digital Audio Digital Video Digital Touch Digital Smell (olfactory) Digital Photos 3D Modeling Web-based Publishing

40%

30%

Customized Content

Photos

Web-based Publishing

20%

E-Mail Audio Video Touch XML 3D Scanning/ Capture

10%

Innovators

0%

Smell

Early Adopters

Early Majority

Late Majority

Laggards

Don’t Know

Figure 20 . Where do you feel YOUR ORGANIZATION adoption is with regards to the following?
Where do you feel YOUR ORGANIZATIONS adoption is with regards to the following?
XML-based publishing Customized Content delivery Scanning/Capture E-mail capture Digital Audio Digital Video Digital Touch Digital Smell (olfactory) Digital Photos 3D Modeling Web-based Publishing
70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

Web-based Publishing
20%

Scanning/ Capture

E-Mail

Photos
10%

Video 3D XML Touch Smell

Customized Content Audio

Innovators

0%

Early Adopters

Early Majority

Late Majority

Laggards

Don’t Know

18

MarketIQ
Business Process Management Content Creation and Delivery

Appendix A Survey Demographics
Survey Background
The survey was taken by 198 individual AIIM members between November 17 and November 28, 2008, using a Web-based tool. Invitations to take the survey were sent via e-mail to several thousand individuals.

Survey Demographics
Organizational Size Survey respondents represented organizations of all sizes. The largest portion (60%) of the survey population came from medium-sized organizations (101–5,000 employees. Another 26% was comprised of large-sized organizations (5,000+ employees). The remaining 15% of respondents were from small organizations (1–100 employees.)
Figure 21 . How Many Employees Areare Your Organization? in in Your Organization? How Many Employees
1 - 100 101 - 5,000 >5,000+
0% 26% 20% 40% 60% 15%

60%

19

Vertical Industry Affiliation The survey population included individuals spanning a wide swath of vertical industries. Overall, no single vertical comprised more than 13% of the total population, providing a broad perspective.
Which Vertical Industry do you Work Figure 22 . Which Vertical Industry Do You Work In? in? Local government Professional services Utilities/Energy Financial Federal government Insurance Education Healthcare Manufacturing Pharmaceutical Legal Construction/Engineering Publishing Telecommunications & Media Transportation & Distribution Retail Entertainment Other
0% 3% 6% 10% 13%

10%

10%

6%

5%

5%

5%

3%

2%

2%

1%

1%

0%

0%

16% 10% 20%

20

Role Survey findings are reflective of multiple roles and departments within an organization. IT-related personnel accounted for 39% of the survey population, while senior-level management (including CxOs) constituted 9%. The entire breakdown by role is provided in Figure 23.
Figure 23 . What Is Your RoleYour Role Organization? What is in Your in Your Organization?
CxO Executive (not CxO level) Line of Business Executive (not CxO) Business user IT Executive IT Manager/Analyst Other
0% 10% 5%

MarketIQ
Content Creation and Delivery

4%

6%

8%

6%

32%

38% 20% 30% 40%

Appendix A Survey Demographics

Geographic Region and Global Reach Most respondents (62%) came from the United States. Another 14% came from Canada. European respondents comprised 12% of the survey group. Asia-Pacific respondents accounted for 8%. The remaining 4% were from Africa, the Middle East, and South America.
Figure 24 . In Which Geographic Region Are You Located? What Geographic Region do you Work in?
Africa
1%

Middle East

1%

South/Central America

2%

Asia Pacific

8%

Europe

12%

Canada

14%

USA
0% 10% 20%

62% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

21

Underwritten in part by

     Unlock Office with Dynamic Enterprise Publishing  
   
Information workers don’t author everything from scratch – they  frequently find and reuse existing or approved content that was  previously authored by themselves and by others. The nimble  enterprise must enable these capabilities in its productivity  tools, while establishing processes and tracking to support  analysis, transparency and control of information reuse.     Dynamic Enterprise Publishing is not a single application, but a  framework from which many applications can be deployed. It is  built around MarkLogic Server™, the industry’s leading XML  Server, content management systems such as Microsoft®  SharePoint®, and authoring tools such as Microsoft® Office.  Dynamic enterprise publishing enables four essential services  which in turn which facilitate  robust solutions for the  enterprise.    

Dynamic Delivery  
The key to information products that are role and task aware is  dynamic delivery, which allows the enterprise to address a range  of user scenarios quickly and efficiently. Solutions built using  dynamic enterprise publishing services provide a powerful  platform for dynamic delivery. Any number of characteristics can  be considered in the creation of custom information products,  processed in real time, and used to assemble appropriate  information for the end user that accurately reflects their needs  at that moment. Examples of interfaces that benefit from  dynamic delivery are customized publications, self‐service help  systems, call center applications, complex product  documentation systems, and customer‐facing deliverables.  

Content Integration  
Information workers spend a  significant amount of time  looking for information,  modifying it, and combining it  with newly created information.  Most content management  systems address content  integration from an access  perspective, by using metadata  and security to organize how  users can find documents, but  this is only one aspect of content  integration. Solutions built using dynamic enterprise publishing  services provide a powerful foundation for content integration.  Documents in many different formats can be loaded “as is”,  accessed granularly, and reused in new contexts. Dynamic  enterprise publishing allows the author to find components of  content, and flow them into a new document seamlessly.  Documents that benefit from granular reuse include: research  reports, proposal responses, slide presentations, and  professional services engagement deliverables.    

 

Content Analytics  
Enterprises often struggle for insight into the information that  powers their business. Difficult questions arise, such as, how are  new corporate policies in external communications being  adopted by different departments in our global operations? How  many of my contracts need to be revised to incorporate a new  limitation of liability clause? Of the statements of work we  issued to clients where the project ran behind, which  underestimated the level of effort for a particular phase of the  project?  Applications built on dynamic enterprise publishing  services can exploit content analytics to mine and deliver  intelligence to the end user or to other systems to improve  decisions. Content analytics is useful to a number of areas,  including corporate governance, legal discovery, regulatory  offices, product marketing and performance management.  

Document Assembly  
In many industries, especially those subject to regulation,  information is often reused across many different documents to  speed creation and facilitate approval. Because each document  is treated as an independent whole, updates must be made in  each document separately, which is expensive, time‐consuming,  prone to error and lacking in transparency. Document assembly  allows information to be authored as reusable topics, and then  assembled into final documents, either through a user  interaction, or an automated process based on sophisticated  business rules. Document assembly is very useful for operations  documentation, contracts, research reports, statements of  work, and documentation for complex, configured products.  

 
For more information, visit www.marklogic.com, or call +1 650‐ 655‐2300. 

 
Mark Logic is a registered trademark and MarkLogic Server is a trademark of Mark Logic  Corporation, all rights reserved. All other product names mentioned herein are the property of  their respective owners. 

AIIM (www.aiim.org) is the community that provides education, research, and best practices to help organizations find, control, and optimize their information. For over 60 years, AIIM has been the leading non-profit organization focused on helping users to understand the challenges associated with managing documents, content, records, and business processes. Today, AIIM is international in scope, independent, implementation-focused, and, as the representative of the entire ECM industry—including users, suppliers, and the channel—acts as the industry’s intermediary. © 2008 AIIM 1100 Wayne Avenue, Suite 1100 Silver Spring, MD 20910 301.587.8202 www.aiim.org

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful