Building A Business Case For Digital Asset Management

Building a Business Case
for DAM
Bill Rosenblatt
GiantSteps Media Technology Strategies
+1 212 956 1045
billr@giantstepsmts.com
www.giantstepsmts.com

© 2009
GiantSteps 1
Media Technology Strategies

About GiantSteps

 Consultancy focused on content technology strategy
– DAM, content management
– Workflow
– Distribution
– Rights management
 In business since 2000
 Clients include leading media and technology companies
 Front-end strategy work
– Independent of vendors, integrators

© 2009
GiantSteps 2

Today’s Agenda

Sources of ROI for DAM
Scalable Product Methodology
Case Study

© 2009
GiantSteps 3

Axes of ROI

Existing New Products
Operations & Services

Revenue  

Cost Savings  

© 2009
GiantSteps 4

Cost Savings – Existing Operations

 Pros  Results
– Quantifiable – Hardly ever works in
– Measurable commercial media
– Attributable to management environment
 Cons – May work in other industries
– Usually involves layoffs, with command-and-control
negative attitudes culture
– Small magnitudes

© 2009
GiantSteps 5

Revenue – New Products & Services

 Pros  Result
– Larger upside potential – If used by itself, results in
– Larger scope for investment small silos & point solutions
– Growth, positive attitudes
 Cons
– Harder to quantify
– Harder to tie results
specifically to DAM system
– Harder to approve (part of
bigger picture)

© 2009
GiantSteps 6

Cost Avoidance
(Cost Savings – New Products & Services)

 Pros  Result
– Possibly quantifiable – If used by itself, results in
– Tied to revenue, so higher small silos & point solutions
scope for investment
– Could be tied to “we’re doing
this anyway” new initiatives
 Cons
– Harder to tie results
specifically to DAM system
– Harder to approve (part of
bigger picture)

© 2009
GiantSteps 7

The Third Axis:
Single vs. Multiple Groups
(Product groups, business units, etc.)

Single:
– Lower cost
– Easier to justify, approve, and implement
– But usually results in non-scalable silo
Multiple:
– Larger scope for investment
– Justifies more scalability and features
– But requires political planetary alignment

© 2009
GiantSteps 8

The Ideal:
Scalable Product Development
 Base business case on revenue & cost avoidance in multiple
new products and services
– Not just currently known ones
– Potential for future efforts yet to be defined
 Platform for new product development with incremental cost
– Avoid building silos for each new product/service
– Cost savings for existing operations is icing on cake
 Sea change in commercial content businesses
– From one-brand-one-product to one-brand-many-products
– Mindset that new product development is an ongoing thing, not a
one-shot project

© 2009
GiantSteps 9

SPD Advantages

Business case based on upside, positive attitudes, not
cost-cutting and personnel reduction
Scalable platform for growth, not point solution
Yet based on known business needs, not “build it and
they will come”
Scope for major investment with real impact
Process includes “a-ha moment” to accelerate buy-in

© 2009
GiantSteps 10

SPD Business Case Methodology

1. Aggregate future initiatives
2. Identify common capability requirements
3. Create gap analysis
4. Synthesize requirements
5. Create implementation plan
6. Create project organization(s)
7. Identify first project and go!

© 2009
GiantSteps 11

1. Aggregate Future Initiatives

 Interview execs across product groups, business units,
divisions, etc.
– Typically strategy, marketing, business development
 Gather info about future plans
– Could range from specific plans to wish list items
 Get them to be specific
– Timelines
– Priorities
– Financial implications (e.g. revenue projections)
 Interview IT dept. for info on existing systems, architecture
– Resist “build it and they wil come” tendencies

© 2009
GiantSteps 12

2. Identify Common Capability
Requirements
Technical capabilities
– Invariably includes DAM or other form of content
management
Processes to be implemented/improved
Skills to be acquired
Org chart implications
Commonality of themes often surprisingly large
– This is the “a-ha moment”
– Makes it much easier to get buy-in

© 2009
GiantSteps 13

3. Create Gap Analysis

What’s possible now?
What’s possible but too hard, inefficient, expensive?
What’s impossible now?
What has been tried before and rejected, and why?

© 2009
GiantSteps 14

4. Synthesize Requirements

Usually flows naturally from gap analysis
Don’t worry yet about feasibility
– Complexity
– Cost
– Risk

© 2009
GiantSteps 15

5. Create Implementation Plan

 Elements
– Technologies
– Process changes
– Org chart changes
– Training
 Encapsulated into projects
 Prioritized
– Low hanging fruit first
 Rough time and cost estimates
– Formal ROIs will come later
 2-3 year time horizon
– Between annual operating plan and long-range strategic plan

© 2009
GiantSteps 16

6. Create Project Organization

Steering Committee
– Senior business line executives
– High level oversight, fit to strategy
Working Group
– Technical/process/production execs, 1-2 levels down
– Nuts and bolts issues
– Meet more often, report to Steering Committee

© 2009
GiantSteps 17

7. Identify First Project

 Most important criteria:
– Strategic value to business
– Time to impact
– Implementation risk
– Smooth political path
 Less important:
– Cost
– Operational changes
(need some changes, otherwise why bother, and the earlier the better)
 Now is the time to do formal ROI
– If you even need it; benefits could be self-evident by this point

© 2009
GiantSteps 18

Case Study: Associated Press

Largest and oldest newsgathering org in the world
4000 employees in 240 locations worldwide
Cooperative of 1500 daily newspapers
Produces text, photos, graphics, audio, video, and
online content
Serves print, radio, TV, online, and corporate
customers

© 2009
GiantSteps 19

Problems to be Solved

 Siloed systems for each media type
– Text, photo, print graphics, video graphics, audio, video, and web
– Limited ability to link content across media types by subject matter
– Common denominator: ancient teletype-oriented system
 Inefficient newsgathering/editorial processes
– Difficulty in coordinating cross-bureau/desk newsgathering
– Difficulty in communicating with members/affiliates about event
coverage
 Various new product plans
– Different feeds & aggregations of content

© 2009
GiantSteps 20

Disparity of Requirements

Editorial: more efficiency, ease of communication
IT: integrated platforms, ease of future development
and maintenance
Marketing/strategy: new product development, new
revenue sources

© 2009
GiantSteps 21

Methodology

 Gather objectives across multiple axes:
– Functional: editorial, marketing, IT
– Media type: text, photo, video, audio, print graphics, video graphics
– News units: bureaus (LA, Trenton,…), desks (national, business,…)
 Examples:
– Link objects of multiple media types by new event
– Increase internal & affiliate visibility into ongoing coverage
– Create custom news feeds by category to corporate customers
– Feed content grouped by event to media customers (e.g., TV stations)
– Design standard interfaces to/from disparate content systems

© 2009
GiantSteps 22

Methodology

 Observe systems, processes & workflow
 Synthesize requirements
 Present to combined groups
– Enjoy the “a-ha moment”
 Create gap analysis
 Create list of technologies, processes, skills needed
– Metadata creation as early as possible in newsgathering process
 Create implementation plan

© 2009
GiantSteps 23

Common Requirements Synthesized

Examples:
 Create metadata as early as possible
– Preferably during news assignment
 Categorize content by keyword
– Requires combination of technology and “library science” skills
– Must not compromise reporters’ & editors’ ability to move content
onto the wires as quickly as possible
 Create central metadata archive
– Though link to content in existing, separate systems
– Make it possible to search, browse, access content from single
interface (UI or API)

© 2009
GiantSteps 24

Implementation Plan

First project: eAssign
– Assignment tracking system
– Metadata entry at assignment time
Next: eCentral
– Central metadata archive
Various others

© 2009
GiantSteps 25

Successes

 Got various groups together that had previously little
interaction
 Found surprising amount of commonality, even among
seemingly conflicting goals
 Agreed on cross-functional architecture elements
 Enabled investment in enterprise platform for growth instead
of silos and point solutions
 Eliminated the need for much arduous ROI analysis –
management “got it”

© 2009
GiantSteps 26

Case Study: Mass. Medical Society

Journal Watch – summaries of medical journals, daily
news updates, continuing medical education
Print, online, and audio products
Monthly and daily “breaking news”
Large body of outside contributors/editors

© 2009
GiantSteps 27

Problems to Be Solved

 Large number of outside contributors
– Communication with internal editors
– Workflow
 MS Word-based publishing process
 Print first, online later
– Laborious conversion process
 Multiple non-scalable content/metadata repositories
– XML at the end of the line
 Plans for various new online offerings
– Increasing competition

© 2009
GiantSteps 28

Methodology

 Gather objectives across multiple axes:
– Functional: editorial, marketing, IT
– Content type: text, audio, breaking news, longer-term
– Medical practice areas (dermatology, infectious diseases, etc.)
 Examples:
– Increase collaboration among outside and internal people
– Eliminate overlapping coverage
– Enable more user generated content on website
– Streamline editorial processes;
fewer “hands” but same editorial quality
– Direct-to-online path for time sensitive content
– Support migration to new web CMS
© 2009
GiantSteps 29

Methodology

 Observe systems, processes & workflow
 Synthesize requirements
 Present to combined groups
– Enjoy the “a-ha moment”
 Create gap analysis
 Create list of technologies, processes, skills needed
– Metadata creation as early as possible in newsgathering process
 Create implementation plan

© 2009
GiantSteps 30

Common Requirements Synthesized

Examples:
 Create metadata as early as possible
– Create Assignment Desk for this purpose
 Categorize content by keyword
– Requires combination of technology and “library science” skills
– Must not compromise reporters’ & editors’ ability to move content
onto the wires as quickly as possible
 Create central XML repository
– Produce XML earlier in editorial process
– Direct feed from repository to web CMS

© 2009
GiantSteps 31

Implementation Plan

 New staff/management roles
 Streamlining of processes into three areas:
– Content creation
– Product creation
– Product delivery
 Set up Assignment Desk
– Adopt collaboration tools
 Adopt new DAM tools
 Implement new workflows
 Transition to new web CMS
© 2009
GiantSteps 32

Successes
(Same!)
 Got various groups together that had previously little
interaction
 Found surprising amount of commonality, even among
seemingly conflicting goals
 Agreed on cross-functional architecture elements
 Enabled investment in enterprise platform for growth instead
of silos and point solutions
 Eliminated the need for much arduous ROI analysis –
management “got it”

© 2009
GiantSteps 33

Bill Rosenblatt
GiantSteps Media Technology Strategies
+1 212 956 1045
billr@giantstepsmts.com
www.giantstepsmts.com

© 2009
GiantSteps 34

Building A Business Case For Digital Asset Management

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (13)

Similaire à Building A Business Case For Digital Asset Management

Similaire à Building A Business Case For Digital Asset Management (20)

Plus de GiantSteps Media Technology Strategies

Plus de GiantSteps Media Technology Strategies (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Building A Business Case For Digital Asset Management