When managing documents it is critical to know which documents are authoritative and which are not. Authoritative documents speak on behalf of the entire corporation. Non-authoritative documents do not speak on behalf of the entire corporation. Non-authoritative documents are essentially 'work in progress' documents, methods of keeping track of intermediate information, and "scratch paper."
So, a corporation needs to establish an information architecture "barrier" between authoritative and non-authoritative documents. This can be very useful in limiting electronic discovery during litigation, and in making sure that all information used in formal corporate reporting is "trustworthy."
In SharePoint the approval work-flows available to all libraries and lists provide an excellent method for establishing the authority and pedigree of any document. Work-flows modify meta-data, and the approval work-flow modifies the meta-data of the document to identify it as authoritative or non-authoritative.
Having a well organized Policy Taxonomy helps the system identify and manage authoritative documents by keeping them in separate content types. Without a well organized Policy Taxonomy it becomes very difficult to make sure that authoritative and non-authoritative documents are clearly identified and separated.
Having trouble getting your CEO to back your SharePoint project? Tell her that it will help limit and manage exposure to legal discovery as well as regulatory constraints like Sarbanes-Oxeley.
© 2008, Mark Ragar Schneider, All Rights Reserved
Comments