MIS (Management Information Systems) or Intranet: A buyer s guide

Transcription

1 MIS (Management Information Systems) or Intranet: A buyer s guide Date: February 2011 Authors: E Bellamy, P. Valentine MIS: Build vs. Buy The majority of MIS and Intranet solutions deployed in the UK have been completed with the involvement of a specialist third party company. Yet, organisations have the option to keep development in-house, and those large enough to employ their own experienced IT staff may feel that a DIY approach to building the ideal system offers the best option. Once an organisation has made the decision that they need an Intranet or MIS, there is often a perception that the cheapest and easiest option is to develop a system in-house, or use a third party developer. Often pushed by a keen individual, the key benefit seen is that it will fit their requirements. The organisation may already have a relationship with an IT company and consider approaching them with a view to developing a bespoke system on their behalf. This is actually no different from an in-house development; it is just that they are using someone else s expertise. Indeed this could be even more risky as the IT company will not necessarily understand the true requirements, so lead times and subsequent bug fixing may become an issue. While each approach has merits, they share a number of important considerations, and there are pitfalls to be aware of in the DIY approach. Key Issues: Assessing skillsets and managing risk. It is important to study closely the capabilities of both in-house teams and third party suppliers when moving toward a MIS project. The underlying objective should be to minimise risk within the development and rollout process so the solution can be completed on time, on budget and with the support of all the users. It s therefore vital to discover whether the in- house department or supplier has the necessary technical and project management skills and experience to ensure success. Scaling a solution. The size and scope of MIS solutions continues to grow just a few years ago many implementations were designed to cover relatively small numbers of users, whereas today it s common for them to reach many hundreds.

2 Organisations need to consider which approach to project development can help them reach the required number of users at roll-out, and also allow them to scale upwards quickly and effectively as their needs develop. Support and longevity. While design and implementation presents a specific set of challenges, ongoing user and technical support requires different skills and can require considerable resource. Thought should be given to how these needs can be successfully provided for users to cover all working hours and circumstances. Organisations also need to be sure that even if they have the in-house development skills to produce a successful MIS solution, that they are equally capable of developing and upgrading it over a number of years. Can they keep it current with business need or will they need a third party supplier to help achieve this? Unfamiliarity with standards, coding and documentation often lead to the lone developer producing inadequate software. This also results in software that changes dramatically due to the throw-away-and start-again method of development. Systems that have already been developed and are already in the market place will have had all of the bugs ironed out, therefore mitigating support implications. The suppliers of these systems will be up to date with changes in the market place and will be prepared for them ahead of time- and more importantly, implement them very quickly. Bespoke or in- house developments on the other hand, may well require considerable code changes to cope- again, time consuming and expensive. Consultation and communication. End users within organisations clearly have the best understanding of their own businesses and the processes to which a MIS solution is being applied. Care must be taken in involving users at all levels - the views, experience and knowledge of the users themselves is critical in designing a solution that will be not only a functional success, but one which will also find support among its actual user base. Specialists in the field of MIS and Intranets can offer project management experience to make this process operate efficiently and ensure conclusions are properly reflected in the design of the solution. They will also be able to pass on the learning and experience of their other clients-something not possible with a bespoke or DIY solution. Infrastructure and server strategy. Whichever development route an organisation decides to take, a key consideration is how the infrastructure will be provided and where the solution will be hosted. Different organisations have different requirements if a company doesn t have the IT infrastructure internally, then a managed (hosted) solution offers a good option. Many organisations maintain a preference to host this kind of technology themselves, not least for security reasons of having the equipment under their own roof. But building an infrastructure from scratch takes capital expenditure and some time to implement. A hosted service can be up and running quickly and can also be scaled easily as well as requirements expand. Most experienced MIS and Intranet specialists will be able to offer both or even a mix of the two.

3 Another consideration here is resilience and connectivity speeds. Although a hosted solution may be acceptable from a security perspective, network speeds need to be taken into consideration. Some N3 network connections are slow and therefore user experience may be affected in a hosted environment, so in-house server hardware would be a better option. The Solution: MIS and Intranet specialist companies have usually invested tens if not hundreds of thousands of pounds in their staff and base platform in order to produce a scalable, reliable and secure product. The better of these companies will employ a consultative approach where the content and mechanisms that you require will be in built, usually driven by many years of experience and customer feedback within the particular sector they work. Appointing the specialists enables your staff to remain focussed on delivering the work that they were appointed to do. Unless you have the development staff, development standards, project management and information governance skills internally, a DIY or build from scratch Intranet may well expose you and your organisation to significant business risk. Indeed, as is frequently reported that when in-house developers leave or the department of the organisation is dissolved, the remainder of the organisation is left without support or sufficient expertise to maintain the project. Organisations that decide to take the DIY approach with an in house team tend to be very large corporate bodies with the appropriate experience and skills. Even then, and done properly, the lead times will typically be much greater than appointing a specialist company. The solution to all of these pitfalls is to talk to specialist MIS and Intranet system providers and consultants. They are experienced and have many other clients backing up their knowledge, expertise and decision making. From the outset, it is often perceived that the expense of appointing an external specialist may seem higher. However, because these specialists have already designed and built a solution that is already in the market place, the R&D costs will already have been re-cooped. This means that you are often able to achieve a much richer user experience at lower costs in reality. The improved user experience, data governance and lower training curves lead to time and cost savings across the whole organisation for years to come. Why re-invent the wheel? It took a long time to realise that a wheel needs to be round. A DIY solution will usually start off square. What about SharePoint? Do you use it? Killer SharePoint Features: Single Sign On and Document Management

4 Any decent MIS or Intranet system will offer at least a basic Single-Sign On Capability, along with excellent document management that includes version control and access logs. Indeed, Intradoc247 even tells you who has accessed which documents and when. We are frequently asked about Microsoft SharePoint and whether or not we develop in SharePoint or whether the client should go for a SharePoint-based solution. Usual arguments are centred around the abundance of other Microsoft products. In our experience, SharePoint does a few things well; it integrates with Active Directory out of the box, for the most basic of implementations it is basically zero work and IT departments in companies are often Microsoft-oriented (though see the section: "MIS: Build vs. Buy"). We don't use SharePoint for the following reasons; Inflexibility SharePoint is very good at basic document management. To develop it much further than this is very time consuming and often awkward. This leads to longer development time- frames for often inferior functionality and user experience. When you are searching for Intranet systems online, you will find that there are no systems worthy of consideration on the market that make use of SharePoint, in part because of this problem. Compatibility issues An over-reliance on Microsoft technologies leads to difficulties in making content and features cross-browser compatible. Even large portions of the Microsoft website do not render properly on most browsers, though it is improving with time. Furthermore, SharePoint requires Microsoft Server to be installed on and with that often comes more energy intensive, more expensive hardware. Our experience has been that the combination of updates for Microsoft Server, Microsoft SharePoint and then the user's Microsoft OS and Microsoft Browser have worked together to provide an unstable environment in all but the most professional of companies. Usability problems There are reports littered across the internet, and from our dealings with clients, that SharePoint is difficult to use for the non-tech-savvy user. Lower productivity should never be part of your choice. On the contrary- the main reason that you will be looking to implement the Intranet is to increase efficiency and productivity. Expensive to Maintain Staff educated (properly) in MS technologies command a greater cost per hour than non Microsoft technologies and as such will tend to lead to a greater TCO for even a small Intranet, let alone a proper MIS. Expensive Licensing

5 Unless you are a charity or subsidised education organisation, the licensing can be very expensive as indeed can the server software that it must be installed on, the higher cost staffing and the higher specification equipment required. If you get the licensing very inexpensively and you only intend on using it for basic document management, then we would recommend it. Conclusion: If you want to do more than document management and use it as a proper MIS, then the chances are that there is already something out there that will work better for you today, will keep you future proof and at a much lower cost- Intradoc247. And finally... If you would like another analogy, here goes: Consider that the different ways to implement your MIS or Intranet are a bit like comparing athletes in three different disciplines: DIY is like a Marathon; it takes a long time and if you are not well trained and fit, the likelihood is you won t even finish it. Employing your current IT provider, who may have excellent but very different specialities, to build your MIS is like a Steeplechase; still takes a long time, and with lots of barriers to trip over. Using a company such as PinBellCom Ltd to deploy Intradoc247 is like the 100 metre Sprint; slick, fast and painless with no hurdles. This document is 2011 PinBellCom Limited. All rights reserved. No unauthorised copying. Microsoft and SharePoint are trademarks of the Microsoft Corporation. All other marks belong to their respective owners.