(English version below)
Im regulierten Life Sciences-Umfeld kommt der Verwaltung kontrollierter Dokumente wie beispielsweise SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures), Verfahrensanweisungen oder Arbeitsweisungen eine große Bedeutung zu. Change Management-Prozesse sichern die ordnungsgemäße Überarbeitung, Genehmigung, Schulung, Verteilung und ggf. Außerkraftsetzung dieser Dokumente. Neben allseits bekannten Use Cases innerhalb des Change Managements existieren Sonderfälle, die von Unternehmen zu Unternehmen andersartig ausgestaltet werden.
Einer dieser Anwendungsfälle ist der seltene Fall des sogenannten Effectivity Hold.
Who hasn’t already made the painful experience of how bad communication has led to additional costs and reduced the quality of a project at the same time? We don’t want that to happen at all and therefore most project leaders today are very aware of the importance of communication within their project.
To help keeping your communication straightforward in a migration project, let’s have a closer look at the mapping specification as a crucial document in migration projects.
Sometimes not the leading edge technologies are causing you headaches, but also solid requirements like synchronizing your Document object’s attributes with SAP.
In this blog post I will explain the differences and purposes of the OpenText Documentum Archive Services for SAP and OpenText Documentum Content Services for SAP as well as the challenge to synchronize only modified SAP data into OpenText Documentum.
OpenText Documentum Archive Services for SAP
The main purpose of the OpenText Documentum Archive Services for SAP (ASSAP) is to accept content (e.g. the printable bill) delivered by SAP. For this, the ASSAP exposes as ArchiveLink server. With the ArchiveLink protocol, SAP is not only able to archive content but also able to retrieve that content for display purposes. Such content can be for example billing documents. So the active part is SAP. OpenText Documentum is the passive part. The ASSAP will create the link information with SAP archive maintenance data.
The continuously growing number of contracts and their precise handling is a constant challenge to many organizations. Therefore, fme developed an OpenText Documentum D2 based Contract Management Framework. With this framework, clients can efficiently manage their contracts and ensure that they are accurately recorded and audited to meet compliance guidelines. But what’s behind all this? Let’s take a closer look!
OpenText Documentum D2 – a solid backbone
The OpenText D2 background provides a configurable and adaptable basis with which the contract management solution can easily be adapted to customer needs.
Main functions of the fme D2 Contract Management Framework
The solution contains all basic settings for the setup of contract management documents and processes: a set of document types with attributes, lifecycles and workflows, permission control and search and reporting functionality.
Additionally it contains a specific clause library functionally to compose contracts of already reviewed and internally approved text blocks, which are organized as part documents and serve as contract template parts. This reduces risks of inconsistency and ensures organizational compliance.
Despite the ongoing discussion about the prospects of new web technologies, progressive clients or even the need of an unmitigated new user experience, many enterprises are still using the “good old Documentum Webtop” quite contentedly. In general, Webtop applications integrate smoothly with other systems that have spawned over time such as Jive, Jira, CRM and others.
Nevertheless, let’s be honest. There have been some flaws and one of them has always been the content transfer mechanism UCF which can be hard to maintain especially in complex network settings and which causes an annoying dependency on the client’s Java Runtime Environment. With modern browser vendors reducing plugin support and the decision of Oracle to deprecate the Java browser plugin in Java 9, a new content transfer mechanism was long overdue.
(German version below)
For many years now we have seen a trend away from physical hardware and towards virtualization. The reasons are diverse: costs need to be reduced, activities should be automatized and downtime decreased. For a long time virtualization was a synonym for replicating complete server including the operating system. But since the launch of Docker in 2003 the so called „container-based virtualization“ is finding its way into the IT infrastructure of companies.
This trend does not stop even for ECM based software so that DELL EMC (in the meantime acquired by OpenText) launched the Documentum Content Server Version 7.3 with Docker support in November 2016 for the first time.
Imagine, you have a set of user stories for a new enterprise content management (ECM) application. And you have an existing ECM platform up and running or you have selected a new one, but you are uncertain about the platform’s future. You will have to invest money for custom development to make users happy, and you want the solution to be supported for the next decade.
You have two options: stay with your current ECM platform or select a new one. But the decision process takes time – or you give it a try and test a new platform within your project. There are a lot of pros and cons and no general recommendation. It depends on your situation and the requirements for the new application.
I’ve been in the Document Management System (DMS) / Enterprise Content Management System (ECMS) market for more than 20 years. Sometimes very focused on a specific aspect e.g. Technical Documentation, sometimes more general e.g. ECMS platform and sometimes with focus on an industry segment e.g. Life Science. I have seen a lot of vendors, products and technologies coming and going. The latest acquisition and certainly the biggest one was just a week ago. Hopefully, this will not reduce the power of innovation.
Preface: From January 2016 to July 2016, I wrote my master’s thesis at fme in Brunswick, Germany. In the following blog post I am summarizing my thesis and thank all these people who supported me. Especially, my advisor and the IT department.
Tobias Stein, September 2016
Exponential data growth rates make the management of content an enormous challenge for organizations. Terms like »information overload« and »content chaos« express the inefficient situation regarding content management on an enterprise-wide scale. Employees search for documents in different versions, languages and formats across various repositories and systems through the entire company. However, these documents contain important and decision-relevant information that are becoming a key business resource. Moreover, compliance with statutory regulations and technical requirements with respect to storing huge amounts of data are complicated.
Interesting announcement from Alfresco. They started an aggressive > swap out program against Documentum pushing the fear that Documentum is going away or going south soon. First of all, Alfresco is a really good ECM platform – fme has been an Alfresco partner for many years. There might be good reasons for the one or the other company to decide to change their ECM platform within the next weeks or months, but it should have nothing to do with the OpenText acquisition. Fear has always been a bad advisor. Documentum is not going away any time soon, or why do you think OpenText payed 1,6 billion USD? They have to keep up the flow of maintenance money for quite some years to make the deal work.