AIIM Research shows the number of content systems in organizations is on the rise Organizations everywhere face the challenge of managing an ever-increasing volume of content. From documents and files to multimedia assets and web content, CRMs and ERPs, the pressing need for more broadly encompassing information management has become paramount. According to the AIIM 2023 State of the IIM Industry Report, it is evident that organizations are adopting an increasing number of content systems to handle their diverse content needs.
This is an article about names and whether or not they matter. My first intuition was to open with the quote, “What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell just as sweet,” but I thought better of it. Not because it was too cliche, which it was, but because it immediately transported me back to my sophomore year of high school, when the greatest achievement of my life up to that point was winning the role of Romeo in the drama club's production of Romeo and Juliet. Please spare me the reminder of my nerdy teenage years! Anyway, onto the matter at hand. The purpose of this article is to begin a conversation about data and content and whether or not the long-held distinction between the two is still important. I'm admitting to you upfront that I don't have the answer. Instead, I only aim to share what I know.
Making an ECM implementation successful requires planning and attention to detail. The best way to create the right solution is to identify organizational goals and priorities. Learn how to manage a successful implementation in our free guide.
More and more records managers in state and local government operations tell me that their job is changing. In addition to stacks and stacks of scanned files, and a confluence of different types of electronic files, the inclusion of audio and video records are becoming more and more common. Indeed, many managers now must capture, store, and manage things like audio from 911 dispatch, police camera footage, and other documentary evidence that fall outside the typical scope of “records.”
Many organizations feel forced to keep legacy applications alive to retain access to historical data – either for customer service, operational requirements, or compliance. However, keeping these old systems running can use up resources that would be better deployed driving digital transformation. And relying on legacy technology creates business risk because these older systems are much harder to fix when things go wrong and more vulnerable to security threats.
Few announcements in information management have been bigger than Gartner’s article heard round the world that announced the death of Enterprise Content Management (ECM) as we knew it. Michael Woodbridge’s quote gets straight to the point here: “ECM is now dead (kaput, finite, an ex-market name), at least in how Gartner defines the market. It’s been replaced by the term content services, a strategic concept that covers three aspects, namely content services Applications, Platforms and Components.” Since this article was published in 2017, the Information Management industry exploded with new questions, like, Is ECM really dead? What’s this content services thing? It turns out, the story is just a little more complicated than one technology being replaced by another.
In recent years, nothing has sparked more controversy in the information management industry than the 2017 Gartner post officially retiring the term “Enterprise Content Management (ECM)” in favor of a new term, content services. Here at AIIM, we’ve been providing independent research, educational training, and certification for over 70 years. For a good majority of that time, the focus has been on ECM and the practices associated with ECM to capture, store, manage, and preserve information. Heck, we even standardized the term Enterprise Content Management way back in the early 2000s, so in a lot of ways, AIIM is uniquely positioned to help clarify some of the confusion that may still remain.