One reason SharePoint has grown so quickly over the past decade has been the strict controls placed on many corporate portals, or from a general lack
of collaboration support from IT teams. Installing a free version of SharePoint was pretty straight-forward and simple, and would quickly catch on and
spread across a team, between teams, and then throughout the corporate landscape. The whole idea of collaboration sprawl reminds me of the 35 years I lived
in Northern California, watching home development spread in every direction, in most cases without a master plan – causing traffic gridlock and other
infrastructure issues. In large part, this situation helped create the housing collapse years later.
Within our organizations, we required IT to take a look at “this SharePoint thing” and to provide more flexible options for collaboration – many times
at the expense of structured collaboration and sound governance principles, and that may have come back to bite us later. But in the heat of the moment, when
we were all desperate to just get our work done, we fought against these outdated concepts, thinking to ourselves, "We're growing fast, so we need to be
flexible and dynamic. We don't need process or bureaucracy."
But why is it that fast-and-flexible is viewed as mutually exclusive of stable-and-scalable when it comes to systems and repeatable processes?
Consider this example: An externally-facing corporate portal is open to customers, maintained by IT, with content owned by marketing. Nothing inherently
wrong with this scenario. But when several major customers contact a VP late Sunday night because a page link is broken or content is wrong, who gets the
call? Not the guys in marketing. No, it's the folks in IT Operations. Who is ultimately responsible for content and the portal? Marketing wants the ability
to build sites and edit on the fly, and IT wants to ensure environments and features work before pushing them out in front of the customer.
End users and managers want the flexibility and autonomy to serve their customers without having to jump through hoops. Sometimes all it takes is a one-day
delay to lose a customer, so companies need to be responsive to win business, and to support their customers. The vast majority of IT organizations want
nothing more than to deliver that flexibility and control to responsible end users. But they are also tasked with supporting the underlying
infrastructure, whether they maintain that infrastructure on premises or manage one or more hosted services on their end users’ behalf.
Managing collaboration sprawl is as much about changing your company culture as it is about refining your processes. Mention the word “governance,” and
people automatically assume that power is somehow being taken away from them. But there is shared ownership in a healthy governance strategy.
Understanding that shared ownership is more of a cultural issue than a matter of documenting policies and procedures. The problem here is not control of
the content management system or the overall quality assurance process, but healthy communication between IT and end users, and a shared understanding of
what is to be accomplished – both from an end user perspective (fast provisioning, autonomy, service-level agreements with IT) and an IT perspective
(defined policies and procedures, agreed upon response times, change management model).
Good collaboration is definitely a cultural skill. The organizations who are best at collaboration are often those with mature cultures that have clearly
defined change management models that facilitate understanding and execution. The first step to every solution is always to sit down and discuss the
requirements and come to a shared understanding -- before any solution is proposed. After all, until you have a clear picture of the problem space, how can
you be sure you're solving the right problem?
Originally on http://buckleyplanet.typepad.com/samaritanweb/page/7/#sthash.HSgZn7T3.dpuf