More and more companies are deploying their SharePoint 2007 environments. Everyone is enthusiastic, but all are struggling with the same problem. When using MOSS as your central intranet portal and/or information system, how do you give support?
The kind of support you're faced with, can be divided over 4 categories;
- Technical
- Application
- Functional
- User
The first two are easy to define. The IT department has the simple order to keep things running. Don't crash it... please.
User support isn't a real problem either. There's a huge community that provides the answers the user is looking for. Also the support department can produce manuals, FAQ's, (video-) trainings and so on, to support and educate the end-users within the company.
The problem we're facing is the functional administration. Where does the ability to change functions/settings by the user end and does the support of the functional admin begin?
Struggling with myself
I've been trying to figure this out, because many colleagues within the educational sector have been facing this discussion. It's a hard battle between 2 principles. It's a fight between ITL/BiSL vs User freedom.
I love the ability that SharePoint provides for the end-user to change views, add/edit/remove webparts/lists/doc.libs. The most idealistic situation is giving the end-users "Full Control" so they can "build" and/or organize their own information channel. This way, all users can organize information, creating an organic and constantly evolving environment.
Want to change a color? Do it!
Want the information differently sorted? Do it!
Change the picture on the default page? Do it!
Don't know what you're doing? You messed up and don't know how to go back to the former situation? Sorry, you're on your own... => and this is the problem you'll be facing. When giving the user all the freedom, he can't expect that someone else can and will clean up his mess. It's like buying an DVD player, where you break open the case, change a few fuses, add some chips and reconfigure the BIOS and still expecting the manufacturer to provide warranty.
Secondly it's almost impossible to track back what the user did wrong and what the previous situation was. Only thing you can do about it, is deleting the site and deploying the standard template. But that's not an option when the site contains vital educational and/or organizational documents.
Besides, it sounds great: Freedom to the people! Create your own sites! Training the user will give them the knowledge they need! But no one ever stopped and asked the end-user if they are ready for that kind of responsibility. Sure sounds fun, but we are talking about a web based information system, which has to support 30,000+ students in their struggle to get a great education.
We can't sell it to the world that the digital classroom and information system of an educational institution is a playground.
Most user want a system that works and usable. They aren't waiting for the rights to change the generic model of the system, because they like the doc.lib on the left.
Now what?
In what way can we regulate the free use? Well, it's an option to implement the web 2.0 principle of "fake-freedom". Generating a generic model of a system together with end-users is a great way to start off. After this, the user will have the ability to (contributor rights) generate user content. Minor changes that are specific to the department? Ask the support (designer) coordinator of your department to "fix" it. Major changes? Changes that effects the generic model? Than (higher) management have to discuss it and together with the R&D + designers (architects) come to reach a decision if the changes are an improvement or not.
This way, the user has the ability to influence the look&feel + functionality of the system without having to create it on their own. The generic model will be kept intact, but because of MOSS it's structure can be modified and keep evolving with organization.
