Two recent case studies at Opus



Yüklə 461 b.
tarix19.11.2017
ölçüsü461 b.
#11245


Two recent case studies at Opus

  • Two recent case studies at Opus


“O·net” Intranet/Portal

  • “O·net” Intranet/Portal



Background

  • Background

  • Our approach

  • Why SharePoint?

  • Technical overview

  • Lessons learned



Time-consuming/expensive to maintain

  • Time-consuming/expensive to maintain

  • Poor reliability

  • Few options for integration





Structured/dynamic content (Job Postings, Projects, Press Releases, News Letters, Testimonials, Bios, etc…)

  • Structured/dynamic content (Job Postings, Projects, Press Releases, News Letters, Testimonials, Bios, etc…)

  • Static content (Company History, Mission Statement, Descriptions of Services, etc…)

  • Canadian site (www.oredevelopment.com)

  • Project search

  • Site search

  • Flash content



Maintain same design (“pixel perfect”)

  • Maintain same design (“pixel perfect”)

  • Reliable

  • Use internal IT resources sparingly

  • “Good” ROI

  • Easy maintenance

  • Complete by end of year (6 Months)

  • Friendly to search optimization



Delegation of content management

  • Delegation of content management

  • Full control over design

  • Integration options (for other Opus systems)



Gather full requirements

  • Gather full requirements

  • RFPs/vendor selection (Inetium)

  • Site design

  • Implementation

  • Content manager training

  • Main site launch

  • ORE site development

  • ORE site launch



Built-in content management capabilities

  • Built-in content management capabilities

  • Web content management (critical)

  • Document management (to a lesser extent)

  • Publishing model

  • Schedule date to release

  • Version control

  • Approval workflow

  • Templates

  • Multiple page layouts (article with image on left etc.)

  • Custom (policies and procedures)

  • Design Flexibility





Structured site to be free of extraneous managed code

  • Structured site to be free of extraneous managed code

  • Designed to accommodate modular security needs, with a central approval process

  • Leveraged OOB navigation for top and left navs

  • All data maintained in lists, including a couple thousand images

  • Data – joins and filtering of lists revealed interesting quirks in SPD

  • Leveraged Reusable content





Look for ways to use re-use content (lists, master pages, and page layouts seem to be the key)

  • Look for ways to use re-use content (lists, master pages, and page layouts seem to be the key)

  • XSLT is an essential skill for highly-customized SharePoint sites

  • The learning curve for customizing SharePoint is high, but the reward is a site tailored to your needs.

  • The Reusable Content list is a great little tool

  • Because of schedule constraints, using external consulting services (Inetium) was important.









Background

  • Background

  • Designed exclusively by IT

  • “Org Chart” taxonomy

  • Extensive/complicated menu system

  • Search - Google Search Appliance

  • Platform: FrontPage (static content)/.Net (custom web apps)

  • No “portal” tools (collaboration, personalization, etc)



Pain Points:

  • Pain Points:

  • Outdated design

  • Difficult to find “stuff”

  • Difficult for content publishers to update

  • Difficult for IT to support content publishers



Assemble a committee (from a variety of disciplines and levels)

  • Assemble a committee (from a variety of disciplines and levels)

  • Establish high-level scope

  • Gather feedback/research

  • (from the committee, content publishers, and employees)

  • Analyze feedback/research

  • Establish/communicate full scope

  • Implementation

  • Deployment



Ease of publishing for content owners

  • Ease of publishing for content owners

  • Standard Portal Features

    • Personalization, Alerts, RSS, etc..
  • Built-in content management capabilities

    • Custom lists and views (lots)
    • Version control
    • Approval workflow
    • Web content management (just a little)
    • Document management (surprisingly little at first, but more and more)
  • Familiar platform (existing staff)

  • Design flexibility









Option 1 – No Change

  • Option 1 – No Change

  • Option 1

    • My Life
    • My Job
    • My Company
  • Option 2 (Variation of Current Scheme)

    • Departments
    • Application
    • Forms
    • Employee Center
    • Project Delivery


Company-wide survey (ONET Top 5)

  • Company-wide survey (ONET Top 5)

  • Department/steering committee surveys

  • Focus groups (card-sorting sessions)

  • Consulting services (Inetium)

  • Industry best research and best practices (Nielsen Group, Human Factors Int’l)





Design Implementation

  • Design Implementation

    • Master pages (for SharePoint & ASP.Net custom apps)
    • Layout pages
  • Custom site definition

  • Custom controls

    • Location-aware tab-strip
    • Custom breadcrumb
    • “My Links”
  • Convert content sites

    • (Both SharePoint and FrontPage sites)
  • Develop New Areas

    • Main Areas (forms center, landing pages)
    • “My Location” sites
    • Utility areas (Help, Site Map)
    • Home Page
















Audience targeting

  • Audience targeting

  • Article publishing system

  • Forms/surveys

  • Custom lists

  • Business Data Catalog (BDC)



Deployment process

  • Deployment process

  • Backup/restore

  • Site definitions are permanent (cannot be changed after site creation)

  • Hardware requirements (makes development difficult)

  • SharePoint designer bugs!



Several My Location sites have launched location-specific suggestion box lists, local announcements, and local calendars

  • Several My Location sites have launched location-specific suggestion box lists, local announcements, and local calendars

  • Departments have gone above and beyond by helping employees in new ways. (eg. Tax department posts personal tax tips)

  • RSS feeds are becoming more popular

  • A number of custom lists are being developed to replace previously manual processes





Opus Project Library (done!)

  • Opus Project Library (done!)

  • Lease Library (in progress)

  • Project Delivery (‘08)

  • Records Management/Document Retention?

  • FolderNav vs. SharePoint document libraries









Project Delivery

  • Project Delivery

  • Lease Library

  • Records Management/Document Retention





Yüklə 461 b.

Dostları ilə paylaş:




Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©www.genderi.org 2024
rəhbərliyinə müraciət

    Ana səhifə