Document

Report
Taming the Email Monster:
Managing Email… Using SharePoint
Image from www.zemp.com.au
From YouTube.com
Firm Portrait
Greene Espel P.L.L.P.
• Litigation boutique, founded in 1993
• 20 attorneys, 1+ IT staff
• 1 office in Minneapolis, MN
iManage from 2003 to 2012
• WorkSite/FileSite 8.5 only; no EMM, IRM, etc.
• Still on the Verity indexer
• 1.5M files (~75k per attorney)
• 1M+ email messages
No prior SharePoint environment
Agenda
Who am I?
• How did we end up here?
• Tools
• User requirements and information gathering,
planning and implementation
• Summary
• Q&A
How did we end up here?
Current frustrations
• Traditional legal DMS: decent at filing
ingesting… not good at finding
– Rigid top-down filing mechanisms
– Almost nonexistent bottom-up organizational
controls
If you talk about “naming conventions”
for your DMS, your DMS is failing you.
Current frustrations
(continued)
•
•
•
•
•
•
Client stability/QC; plug-in soup
The .NRL and plug-in silo
Indexer upgrade would be expensive
No noteworthy integration with other systems
Not easy to customize and extend
A la carte model for additional functionality
–
–
–
–
–
“Send and File”/email management
Records Management
Workflow
Offline client
Web/Mobile access (Extranet and web module functionality and client
familiarity issues)
• Niche product
Evolution
evolution of man's spirit
by ~ilsung
http://ilsung.deviantart.com
Evolution: SharePoint
DMS
•
•
•
•
•
•
Much more flexible for organizing content
Content liberated from plug-ins
Intranet (we didn’t have one)
Extranet possibilities (one familiar to clients)
Additional functionality is in-box
Realistic platform for building and integrating
applications
• Greater functionality in general
…but what about email?
Why do we
put email in
the DMS?
Email frustrations
• Findability is horrible
– No ideal way to break down the “email folder”
• Threading not supported
• Ad hoc folders are a poor solution
• Tagging not supported
– Search is marginally helpful
• Contacts are converted from objects to inconsistentlyformatted text strings
• There’s just too much email!
SharePoint OOTB
options
• Managed Folder journaling
• Email enabled doc libraries/lists (send to)
• “Connect to Outlook”—SharePoint lists in
Outlook
• Drag-and-drop (Microsoft style)
Managed Folder
Journaling
• Pros
– Managed folders appear in Outlook and OWA
– Records management integration
– Uses .MSG format
• Cons
–
–
–
–
–
–
Fumble!
Only supported with Exchange 2007 (!)
Designed for a handful of folders
Designed for archiving
Cumbersome to manage
Cannot file attachments separately (using this method)
Marginal dedupe functionality : won’t copy the same email twice, but email
messages with the same name can either overwrite or append a unique
number
– No automatic metadata capture (To, From, etc.)
– Attaches journal report
Email-enabled doc
libraries and lists
• Pros
– Can “send to SharePoint”
– “Reply all” for external users can be routed to SharePoint
• Cons
– Messy
•
•
•
•
•
10 yard loss!
Creates lots of AD/GAL objects; security must be set manually
If email addresses are created automatically, no control over the name
Must specify which lists and libraries are email enabled
Attachments are split out from the email message
Similar “dedupe” method to Managed Folder Journaling: can append a unique
number to files with the same name
– Saved in .EML format (!)
– No content type support—no automatic metadata capture (To, From,
etc.)
– Can get spam; may pose an anti-spam licensing/logistics issue
“Connect to Outlook”
• Pros
– Offline support
• Cons
Ineligible receiver!
– Read-only for doc libraries
– Drag-and-drop will create new thread in
Discussion Lists
– No automatic metadata capture (no To, From,
etc.)
– Creates PST on the client
Drag-and-drop (kinda)
Drag from Outlook to Desktop to Explorer View
• Pros
– No plug-ins required
Intentional grounding!
• Cons
– Horrible
– No content type support
• Bypasses metadata prompts
• No automatic metadata capture (From, To, etc.); files will be
in the “checked out” state if additional fields are required
• No dedupe (must have a unique filename)
SharePoint OOTB
options
Email
format
Metadata
capture
Dedupe
Read-only
Managed
by
Additional
notes
Managed
folder
journaling
.MSG (or
TNEF)
No
No (but it
can
append a
unique
number)
No
Admin
Exchange
2007 only
Emailenabled doc
libraries
.EML
No
No (but it
can
append a
unique
number)
No
Admin
Makes a
mess in
AD; can get
spam
Connect to
Outlook
N/A
No
No
Yes (for doc User
libraries)
Offline
access;
creates PST
Drag-anddrop
.MSG
No
No
No
Horrible
User
Third
party
solutions
rd
Why 3 party solutions?
• Necessary for an email management solution
for humans
Email management for humans
Third party solutions
Some specific things to watch out for:
– Do they target the legal market?
– How does it manage client/matter lists on the server
and client sides? (“My Matters”?)
– How does it handle duplicates and invalid characters?
– How does it handle metadata capture?
– Does it file in place, or move messages?
– What kind of search interface does it have?
– How does it present the option for attaching
SharePoint items?
– Is it presenting an Outlook view, a webpage within
Outlook, or something custom?
– Does the client support background filing?
Third party solutions
(cont’d)
– Does the client have preview functionality, and how
does it work?
– Does it leverage SharePoint as a backend without
changing it or layering functionality over it?
– Is a migration utility available? How does it work?
– How stable is it?
– What additional functionality does it provide beyond
drag-and-drop? (“Send and File,” round-tripping, etc.)
– Does the vendor blog? Tweet?
– Where are they located? Do they have a US presence?
– Do they partner with other implementers?
Third party options
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Epona EmailFiler/DMSforLegal
MacroView Message/DMF
Handshake Email Director
Colligo Email Manager/Contributor
Workshare Workshare Point
Sword Excalibur
harmon.ie harmon.ie for SharePoint – Outlook Edition/Outlook Enterprise
Edition
Scinaptic OnePlaceMail
KnowledgeLake Connect
EverSuite Email Management for Outlook
SharePointBoost Outlook Integration 2.0
ShareTools.biz ShareBox for SharePoint
CodePlex SharePoint Outlook Connector
CodePlex Mail2Share
Dynamics CRM?
Epona DMSforLegal
• Why we selected DMSforLegal
– Legal focus
– Uses native SharePoint functionality (pulls in SP views,
etc.)
– Outlook search == SharePoint search
– Native preview functionality
– Background email filing
– Similarity to iManage—My Matters, Recent Documents,
subscription model
– Windows Explorer integration (any app)
– Migration tool for iManage, and iManage experience
– Exposes managed metadata tags in Outlook for filing
Epona DMSforLegal:
navigation
Epona DMSforLegal:
filing pane
Epona DMSforLegal:
filing pane
Epona DMSforLegal:
filing pane
Epona DMSforLegal:
filing pane
Epona DMSforLegal:
send and file
Epona DMSforLegal:
attachment options
Epona DMSforLegal:
background filing
Epona DMSforLegal:
Outlook’s perspective
Epona DMSforLegal:
configuration options
Email organization: we
hardly knew ye
• Assessment: 70% of DMS content is email
(and growing)
• Email increasingly is the medium, the mode,
and the content: “email” can go anywhere, be
anything
• Traditional approach:
• Dump all email in the ‘Email’ folder
• Email ends up in other folders as well
• Deal with the mess afterwards
Filing structure
Determining the “right blend” of:
– Site collections
– Sites
– Doc libraries
– Folders
– Tags
– Content types
– Site columns
– Views
New approaches to old
problems
“Allow subfolders! vs. No subfolders allowed!”
– Goal: location selection only—no additional
metadata prompts
– Folders provide one-click targets
– Managed metadata tags do too, and also allow
multi-value
• Future enhancement: threaded email view?
Filing Structure Process
• Small group of users at first
• Design SharePoint- and firm-optimized structure
first, worry about migration later
• Create iManage to SharePoint decoder wheel
• Don’t get paralyzed by the process—it won’t be
perfect
• Beware of designing for the exception
• Spend time to “refile” a sample matter to
demonstrate the new organizational model
Specific
considerations
• Email vs. non-email content types and mixing
them within the same doc library: the “email
might go anywhere” problem
• Making site column names generic enough for
reuse for a better search experience
• Links to DMS documents:
– Links can be anywhere in an email, and can be given
context
– No more sea of attachments
– No attachment icon (as with NRLs)
Other considerations
• SharePoint as a platform: reduce email traffic and
increase efficiency by leveraging other SharePoint
features
• Outlook vs. browser access: cater to Outlook’s
limitations or break free from the “attorneys [must]
live in Outlook” mantra?
• Other third party plug-ins
– BLOB externalization (StoragePoint)
– Browser previewer (BA Insight Longitude Search)
• Cross platform (and mobile) access
• Scanning solutions not mature
Summary/Lessons
learned
• Once-per-decade chance to revisit
fundamental doc organization and processes
• Don’t re-implement existing DMS limitations
• Understand thoroughly SharePoint’s many
mechanisms for content organization
• Take plenty of time
• Involve many over time and iterate
• Don’t worry if your lines are straight
Contact info
Ryan Helmer
Greene Espel P.L.L.P.
Email: [email protected]
Direct: 612.373.8351

similar documents