Absorption Costing Method
Cost/Benefit Analysis for Implementing ECM, BPM Systems
Determining the ROI for a significant investment, such as adopting an ECM or BPM system, is no easy task.
Doug Allen, CRM, CDIA+
T
he adoption of enterprise content management (ECM) and business process management (BPM) systems is often spurred by regulatory and compliance concerns. As Thomas Hogan,Vignette president and chief executive officer, told Computerworld, the move to adopt ECM technology is driven by “two fundamental business catalysts”: 1. How to render more value in terms of greater revenues or stronger loyalty 2. The need to understand how information flows within the enterprise because of compliance requirements
At the Core
This article Discusses the importance of developing a return on investment (ROI) model for large technology investments Examines factors to include in any cost comparison Provides a sample cost/benefit analysis
While these concerns underlie the value-driven
34
The Information Management Journal
•
May/June 2007
Enterprise Content Management vs. Business Process Management Solutions
While enterprise content management (ECM) and business process management (BPM) software solutions have similarities, their focus is different, and they are seen by analysts, such as the Gartner Group, as being distinctly different. ECM is based upon a number of technologies that promise to allow organizations to capture, manage, store, and provide content and documents to their employees, customers, and other key stakeholders.ECM solutions may include the following: document imaging, electronic forms management, web content management, e-mail management, digital asset management, and workflow technologies. BPM focuses more on active and complex business processes than on managing specific elements of content.BPM systems often rely on the same content components as ECM, such as digital imaging, digital asset management, and e-mail management, but their primary mission
Determining the ROI for a significant investment, such as adopting an ECM or BPM system, is no easy task.
Doug Allen, CRM, CDIA+
T
he adoption of enterprise content management (ECM) and business process management (BPM) systems is often spurred by regulatory and compliance concerns. As Thomas Hogan,Vignette president and chief executive officer, told Computerworld, the move to adopt ECM technology is driven by “two fundamental business catalysts”: 1. How to render more value in terms of greater revenues or stronger loyalty 2. The need to understand how information flows within the enterprise because of compliance requirements
At the Core
This article Discusses the importance of developing a return on investment (ROI) model for large technology investments Examines factors to include in any cost comparison Provides a sample cost/benefit analysis
While these concerns underlie the value-driven
34
The Information Management Journal
•
May/June 2007
Enterprise Content Management vs. Business Process Management Solutions
While enterprise content management (ECM) and business process management (BPM) software solutions have similarities, their focus is different, and they are seen by analysts, such as the Gartner Group, as being distinctly different. ECM is based upon a number of technologies that promise to allow organizations to capture, manage, store, and provide content and documents to their employees, customers, and other key stakeholders.ECM solutions may include the following: document imaging, electronic forms management, web content management, e-mail management, digital asset management, and workflow technologies. BPM focuses more on active and complex business processes than on managing specific elements of content.BPM systems often rely on the same content components as ECM, such as digital imaging, digital asset management, and e-mail management, but their primary mission
References: Hoffman, Thomas. “Q&A: Vignette CEO Calls Content Management ‘A Strategic Priority.’” Computerworld.com, 7 September 2005. Available www.computerworld.com/databasetopics/data/story/0,10801,104445,00.html?source=NLT_P M&nid=104445 (accessed 5 April, 2007). May/June 2007 • The Information Management Journal 41