Document management systems can be defined as the set of programs that allows the user to keep a record of the documents being produced in the system. It helps store information like: who created the document and at what time. This recording can also be done in the form that the user can also have the Images of the documents being created. Basically, Document management systems are meant for providing complete control over the various e-documents created in the system like spread sheets, graphics and word processing documents etc. They are known as Electronic Document Management Systems.

This is one system that facilitates the user to:

1. Retrieve: DMS allows the user to retrieve the e-documents from any remote computer thus, allowing the user to keep a complete record of the documents being created.
2. Share: In an organization, all type of documents that are being created can also be required for sharing amongst other users, this can be done using DMS.
3. Track: All the documents that are being created in the network require, that their track record is maintained. A DMS allows the user to keep a track of the document as to when the document was created and by whom.
4. Distribute: Distribution of the e-documents in the network is important for any organization so, through DMS the userhas the ability to distribute to other members in the network.
5. Provide security: The idea of document sharing is very interesting but it still accounts for restricted access i.e. the user has the ability to make a particular document shared only with a set of certain preffered people using the DMS.
6. Storage & Integration: A DMS allows the user to create or modify the document from any remote system without having to leave the current application thus, reducing the inconvenience being caused.
At Webtech Softwares, we make every possible endeavor to make the entire concept of data storage and retrieval easy and fluent in usage. Our aim is to increase efficiency and reduce hassle.

Interview with Scott Abel by Diane Wieland, special to The Content Wrangler

Diane: Scott, you’ve spoken for years about the need for organizations to control content. Now that content management is finally on the minds of the masses, can you tell us more about the difference between managing documents and managing content? That is, pieces of content?

Scott: Yes, I can. Let’s start with document management, an approach to controlling files of various types. User manuals, presentations, web pages, annual reports, brochures, animations, and white papers are all types of documents that need to be controlled. Document Management is the process through which organizations manage whole documents; move them through approval processes, control versions of the doc, and store them.
image However, documents are comprised of smaller pieces of content called components. We need to manage components of content —not just the documents they end up being used to create—in order to deliver the right information, to the right people, in the right language, at the right time, and in the right format. So, content management is really about managing all of the pieces of content that are used to assemble documents, whether they are physical documents like printed user manuals or virtual documents like Web pages or information delivered to a mobile device.

Diane: So, managing content is not so much about moving documents around as it is about managing the smaller pieces of content—the components—in ways that are beneficial to both an organization and the various customers they serve. What is the benefit of this approach?

Scott: In short, the answer to this question always relates to money. Profit, to be exact. Profits can be improved in a variety of ways. It’s not just selling more product that leads to increased profit. Reducing and eliminating unnecessary expenses can also contribute to the bottom line. The return on investment possible from effectively managing content components—the individual pieces we make to manufacture the information products we use to run our businesses—is one of the primary financial reasons why organizations move to content management. Organizations sometimes express the benefits in non-monetary terms (meeting regulatory mandates, avoiding risks, improving customer service) but make no mistake, no matter how they couch the reasons why managing content is needed, profit is almost always the primary motive.

Of course, in order for an organization to make the changes needed to efficiently manage content, they must first admit their content is a business asset worthy of being managed in a formal, repeatable, auditable process. Today, for some crazy reason, even some of the most forward-thinking organizations on the planet still don’t think of content as a business asset worthy of being managed. This is increasingly changing, but by and large, content is seen as some type of art project where creativity and writer’s preferences often guide its creation. I expect this to be less and less the case in the future.

Then in order to demonstrate savings, an organization has to know what it costs them to create and mismanage content today. Only then, can improvements be meaningfully measured. This information is not typically available in technical documentation, training, and support centers today.

Diane: Are you saying this type of information is available in other industries? Does this have something to do with why we’ve heard you say that technical publications and training department managers can learn a lot from the fast food industry?

Scott: Yes, today most technical documentation and training departments fail miserably when it comes to really managing their people and processes. A McDonald’s manager is far more likely to know more about his or her store than a tech docs, training, or support center manager knows about his or her department. This is, of course, unacceptable. And, it’s totally unprofessional. In what other professions would such an absence of metrics and control be allowed? When you think about technical documentation and training management in this way, it’s easy to see that we have a long way to go before we can seriously call what we do professional.

image Again, in organizations that value content as an asset, this is less likely to be the case. In such organizations, managers are provided with relevant training and the requisite tools needed to effectively manage their departments and the products they create. You won’t see managers in these organizations using an Excel spreadsheet to track metrics manually. Nor will you see them do dozens of other time-sucking tasks that most documentation managers do by hand today. We should rid our profession of these and other less-than-efficient mechanisms for collecting metrics. We need to admit that there is nothing professional about the way we attempt to manage content today. We need to make requisite changes so we can begin to efficiently collect metrics that can help us make informed business decisions based on observable, measurable facts.