The reason we spend so much time (or should, hər halda) working out governance plans is because we want the SharePoint solution to be as effective as possible. We want good infrastructure and rules to keep it humming and safe in case of disaster. We want good security processes to both properly secure the environment but also make it reasonable to manage. We want a good information architecture that will stand the test of time, ideally managing to survive a major organizational change in the company.
To achieve that desirable objective, a governance document and plan can devolve into a bunch of “thou shall” and “thou shall not’s”, kimi:
- Thou shall not create SharePoint security group; use AD instead.
- Thou shall not create folders in document libraries; use content types and views instead.
- Thou shall create all document content types based off a specific custom base type.
- Thou shall not create an information taxonomy based off today’s company org chart.
“Thou shall” and “thou shall not” certainly have their place in the governance plan.
A more successful governance plan will also have a strong marketing angle. It should sell and justify itself to the maximum extent possible. A truly successful governance plan relies upon the voluntary cooperation of all SharePoint users. (There are fringe cases where community cooperation is not needed, such as when SharePoint is used by a very small number of tightly managed users; I’m sure you can think of others). If the user community doesn’t buy into your governance plan then it will be partially successful at best.
I use that word “buy” deliberately. The community will buy the governance plan if it’s fundamentally sound and you go to some effort to sell them on it. Selling leads to marketing and that’s why I think that a governance plan should be considered a marketing plan too. Convince your end users that they need to follow the governance plan and they will voluntarily follow it. If you can get a critical mass of people following the governance plan then the plan’s benefits follow and you’ll have a stronger environment for it.
</son>
Da Twitter məni izləyin http://www.twitter.com/pagalvin
Paul,
Mən həyata gördüm idarəetmə qayda yalnız bir nümunəsi idi. Bu digər bəzi hallarda və az mənada mənada edəcək. Siz az nəzarət / support ilə zəif AD mühit varsa, sonra SharePoint qrupları yaxşı ola bilər. Digər tərəfdən, Əgər fəal və yaxşı idarə AD varsa, o SP qruplar əlavə lazımsız hiss.
Böyük stuff Paul!
Could you elaborate on "Thou shall not create SharePoint security group; use AD instead."? Mən sizə bu ən yaxşı təcrübə ola bilərsiniz nə haqqında düşüncə bilmək istərdik.
Təşəkkür,
Paul
Paul, marketinq yaxşı info. Mən bunu görmək kimi problem İdarəetmə Planları yaradılmış və yanlış insanlar məxsus olur ki, – bu İdarəetmə planı malik etməli olan biznes və İT yuxarıda müəyyən şeylər ətrafında əminlik təmin etməlidir.
Mən iş geri nəzarət verilməsi haqqında danışmaq yerləşir kimsə bu bir kağız etdi http://www.bridgeincubation.nl/uploads/knowledge/Andrew_Woodward_-_April_2009_-_SharePoint_Governance.pdf və Paul Culmsee də bu mövzuda bəzi həqiqətən dərin fikir gönderdi http://www.cleverworkarounds.com/2008/10/14/its-all-joels-fault/