Enterprise Content Management (ECM) Implementation

Description

Summary of the work An ECM for a 300-employee organisation with approximately 5TB of information across various directorates and channels. Move content to Microsoft 365, define information governance & classification​, retire legacy systems and leverage RSSB's investment in Microsoft 365. Post MVP options include: - information protection policies​ - automated governance​ - records management​​ Expected Contract Length Implementation - 15 months plus hypercare Latest start date Monday 13 December 2021 Budget Range Our budget for the MVP including project implementation and year one licensing of any relevant non-Microsoft software/tool is £85,000 (maximum). Why the Work is Being Done RSSB is embarking on a digital workplace program to modernise its Enterprise Content Management (ECM) platform and approaches. This will include moving content and knowledge housed in existing content management and collaboration systems to a new destination environment and structure within Microsoft 365 (our chosen platform for content management). RSSB’s legacy content management and collaboration system is an on premis physical server based file share environment hosted in a local data center. Many colleague use this alongside their OneDrive and Microsoft Teams. We need this significant business change to be well designed to avoid business disruption, particularly while migrating documents and files that are actively used actively by members of staff. In summary, we are undertaking this business change in order to: 1. deliver a Minimal Viable Product Enterprise Content Management system (using Microsoft Sharepoint / Microsoft 365) 2. define new rules and ways of working around how we manage our content – to make it easier to structure and locate and also so we can better manage how long we keep our content for and avoid paying to store content that we no longer need We need to complete roll out of Enterprise Content Management by January 2023. Problem to Be Solved We want to: - make it easier to structure and locate our content and knowledge - make it easier and quicker to collaborate on content we create - make it easier to reuse the same content across multiple channels (Website, LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook etc) - improve our management of document retention and archiving - improve our information security - reduce our costs for information storage, back up and disaster recovery - make it easier to meet compliance requirements security access and records controls , therefore reducing risks of fines (GDPR, BS10008) - enable RSSB to fully leverage the Microsoft 365 suite of applications Who Are the Users -Migrate all existing files from Legacy repositories to MS 365 -Create appropriate governance structure & policies -Define a collaborative architecture and standard way of using technology across business -Provide a mechanism to capture content into a managed repository and assign metadata to content for easy search and retrieval -Provide mechanism for authorised users to search and retrieve, also allow external users to access authorised content -Manage content throughout its lifecycle -A simple and straightforward ECM environment which is easy for users to understand -Identify utilisation of existing Microsoft 365 technology for document approval and routing -Access to user guides with information on how to use Microsoft 365 to perform various tasks -Audit trail of system usage -Solution must maintain alignment to Microsofts 365 technology, in addition it should also provide availability & performance inline with RSSB's current Microsoft licensing Post MVP - Help to establish effective security controls by defining and applying access control permissions - Recommend options to deploy and apply data retention and destruction policies - Recommend Data backup and archiving based on the policies defined Early Market Engagement Not applicable Work Already Done AvePoint have reviewed the best approach and provided four options for an ECM: 1: Basic lift and shift (Rejected) 2: Migrate live documents to Microsoft 365 and archive the remainder (Rejected) 3: Migrate live and archive documents to Microsoft 365, MVP (Approved by RSSB) 4: Migrate live and archive documents to Microsoft 365, full implementation (Rejected) The chosen MVP option includes: - moving all files from legacy systems to Microsoft 365​ - information governance and classification defined​ - some business change management After Implemention of the MVP, future options include: - information protection policies​ - automated governance​ - records management​ Existing Team The project team at RSSB will consist the following roles: - Sponsor's Agent (and Business Change Manager) - Project Manager - Business Analyst (and tester) - IT Specialist (and Enterprise Architect) - Procurement Manager - Directorate Representatives ("ECM Advisors") Current Phase Beta Skills & Experience • Implementing Enterprise Content Management using Microsoft 365 tools (6 points) • Information architecture design and development (6 points) • Supporting organisations to introduce new ways of working, policies, processes and governance for enterprise content management (6 points) • Data migration (4 points) • Business change management, in particular working with Business Change Managers internal to the organisation they are supporting (4 points) Nice to Haves Experience of designing information architecture for regulatory or research content (4 points) Work Location Supplier can be based anywhere. Will require a mix of remote working (via MS Teams) and face to face contact through attending at RSSB's offices, The Helicon, 1 South Place, Moorgate, London EC2M 2RB. Working Arrangments 1. The supplier and RSSB will each appoint a single point of contact for managing day to day questions and issues. The wider teams will be involved in progress meetings and for escalation. 2. Any travel expenses will be charged at cost with prior written agreement from RSSB's Project Manager Security Clearance Supplier's staff must keep all data, project documents and information strictly confidential in accordance with the Confidentiality clauses stated in the Call-off Contract. Additional T&Cs The supplier must provide a fixed price for the work. Please provide a detailed invoice schedule which is based on delivery of work. No. of Suppliers to Evaluate 3 Proposal Criteria • Supplier's understanding, approach, methodology and proposed design (9 points) • Team members expertise (CVs) and adequate allocation of appropriate resources for successful delivery (6 points) • Solution/s, estimated timeframes and indicative costs for post MVP options (5 points) • Project Management - Provide a ‘Gantt Chart’ detailing key tasks and timeframes in months (4 points) • Project Management - Provide a ‘Resource Table’ detailing tasks, resources, roles and effort in days to successfully deliver the MVP to time, cost and quality (3 points) • The proposal has identified risks and proposed effective management and mitigation (3 points) Cultural Fit Criteria • Upskilling the client-side team to lead delivery of ECM roll out following initial pilot (6 points) • Working closely with the client-side team to overcome delivery issues (5 points) • Collaborative approach to working with staff at all levels (4 points) • Providing regular updates (3 points) • Understanding of the ECM requirements that are unique to member organisations (e.g. sharing content externally) (2 points) Payment Approach Fixed price Assessment Method • Case study • Work history • Reference • Presentation Evaluation Weighting Technical competence 60% Cultural fit 20% Price 20% Questions from Suppliers 1. Is there an incumbent provider for this service? If so, who is it please? The only incumbent technology is Microsoft 365 for providing storage of content and permissions. We use AvePoint Compliance Guardian for document and content scanning in accordance with GDPR compliance requirements. 2. Is there any specific ECM platform your have decided to go ahead with ? or there are any specific ECM Platform you will consider? Microsoft 365 is our baseline stack technology. Solution must maintain alignment to Microsoft 365 technology, in addition it should also provide availability & performance inline with RSSB's current Microsoft licensing. 3. Who completed the previous stages (Discovery, Alpha etc.), and are they still involved going forwards? AvePoint and The Inform Team completed the Discovery Phase and provided results to RSSB. 4. We would use a hybrid approach, with only the assignment lead available to be in London. Travel limitations and team construct would make it impossible for others to attend in person. Is such a team acceptable to the contracting authority? Yes, its acceptable, however, please consider other factors like travel expenses which need to be agreed mutually in advance etc. 5. Is Avepoint product locked in – do you want bidders to use Avepoint product to manage the content migration? No, however, additional tooling would need to be justified if we couldn't use existing deployed technology. 6. Are you able to provide more information on the 5TB of content? e.g. Approx. number of files, how many network shares the files are spread across, an indication of the depth of any hierarchical folder structures in the network shares, whether there are large chunks of the storage made up of very large files (e.g. video) etc. Please see the following high level data points below:a) The majority of files are MS Word documents, followed by PDF, images, and other MS Office documentsb) There are three primary network shares to consider (G – shared drive plus legacy department files, K – department drives, and an ‘archive’ share for archiving old content)c) There sections within the files shares which contain large files, with Marketing and Comms currently having the most at approx. 154GB with 41K files. There are also areas within the business which store large files i.e. outputs from R&D projects 7. We understand the 5TB of content to be migrated is in the form of documents / files all stored on server based network file shares. Is this correct or is there other content (e.g. documents held in a document management system or page content in an older SharePoint system)? RSSB utilises the following to store and manage content:a) Network attached storage file shares, currently on-premise. We may move to Azure storage for better interim support due to size and support of NAS.b) Microsoft 365 applications (Teams, SharePoint, etc). Some apps are well structured (our BMS Policy Library), others vary based on their application of control and governance by the owner. Use of Teams has accelerated, however governance and structure are inconsistent.c) RSSB also uses an XML CCMS for creation of standards (out of scope), however the outputs (PDFs etc) may require control within the target ECM. 8. Re “… – make it easier to reuse the same content across multiple channels (Website, LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook etc)”Is it acceptable that this will be met by ensuring that content is stored in a well architected system with metadata, such that it is easy to locate a piece of content for use on other channels? Or are specific tools / features required to facilitate sharing beyond what is available with OOTB SharePoint? e.g. A button to “Share on LinkedIn” which is available for videos and automatically posts to the RSSB twitter ? We are not looking for the functionality you described, the primary context of “make it easier to reuse the same content across multiple channels” is potentially making best use of the Microsoft stack to create content rather than documents, which could originate within the ECM and be pushed to other formats/solutions in the future. This needs to be a consideration within the information modelling phase, however there isn’t an expectation of building a functional pipeline to implement this within the ECM project. 9. What will AvePoint’s involvement in the project be, if any? Is there an expectation that AvePoint’s migration tool will be used? Are AvePoint also bidding to perform the migration? We current utilise Compliance Guidance for data privacy compliance scanning, which also offers some functionality for classification and moving content. If its beneficial to use this technology to support migration suppliers can propose, however, alternatives would need to be justified within the proposal. We are not aware if AvePoint or partner are currently bidding. 10. Re: “Provide a mechanism to capture content into a managed repository and assign metadata to content for easy search and retrieval”Once the system is live and people are creating documents, can we assume the metadata will be assigned manually apart from some fields (e.g. “created date”) which can be assigned automatically? For the content that is being migrated, is it expected that we create rules to assign some metadata automatically? Is there likely to be any automatic assigning of metadata based on the document content? For the migration from legacy to new repository, where possible we’d expect the supplier to provide technology that can automatically classify documents and apply metadata based on the information model and rules defined. For new documents created within the ECM post go-live we’d expect a combination of automatic metadata completion and manual addition. We want minimal impact on end users where possible and within scope. 11. Re “Supplier’s understanding, approach, methodology and proposed design”Please clarify ‘design’ in this context as we would expect the design to be established as part of the project, as it must be informed by discussions with stakeholders and the existing document mass and proposed metadata schema. Or do you mean ‘design’ as in a broad overview of what parts of MS 365 we’d expect to use and how they’d be put together? Whilst we would expect the formal design to completed within the project (information architecture and technology/applications to be used), we would expect the supplier to provide a typical approach based on the outline requirements, which may include applications and templates i.e. information model requirements. 12. We assume the documents are internal only and there is no intention (certainly at this stage) to make the documents available externally to RSSB members. Is this correct? There isn’t an expectation to utilise the ECM solution to deliver external document access beyond our current use cases i.e. creating a Team which provides access to internal and external users. 13. Have you identified the use cases for the MVP implementation? We have identified 16 requirements based on the discovery phase undertaken. These requirements will be shared as part of the next stage of the procurement exercise. Further work would be required to develop use cases, and this can be supported by RSSB’s in-house Business Analyst as part of the project. We’d also be able to share more detailed findings from the previous discovery work with the preferred supplier. 14. With regard to the MVP implementation, what is:a. Content sizeb. Number of usersc. Departmentsd. Number of folders a. Content size – 5TBb. Number of users – 699 users were identified as creators/owners of content during the Discovery Phase, but currently the total number of employees are 300.c. Departments – RSSB consists of the following departments: Standards, Systems Safety and Health, Research and Development, Sustainable Development, Projects, Human Resources, Finance, Business Development and Engagement, Information Management and Technology, Business Change & Strategy and Business Management Office.d. Number of folders – (to be advised) 15. Has the source and content been evaluated and prioritize in terms of content that needs migration? Across the G:\ and K:\ department shares more than 58% of the content (approx. 1.92 TB out of 3.27 TB) has not been modified in the last 3 years. The inactive data needs to be analyzed further. If it is not required, then it can be moved to archive storage. As noted within a previous question, we also utilise MS Teams and SharePoint for document storage and collaboration. 16. Have you done a content classification and metadata for the files and folders to be migrated or do you need assistance? We would expect the supplier to work with RSSB to create the information model, which would include proposed structures and the metadata model. 17. What is your expectation with regard to the following:a. Can we migrate data during business hours?b. Can the data migration be done from offshore? a. This would depend on phasing for migration to be agreed with RSSB. We could potentially migrate a department within business hours if the duration was acceptable, however, migrating the whole company probably wouldn’t be acceptable.b. This would depend on the rationale and the data protection safeguards in place by the supplier and supplier’s contractors. 18. Please could you outline of the filing structure where the legacy existing repositories where the files are held for migration. The file / folder structures vary depending on how the department has organised their content over time. There is some uniformity aligned to business process, however there is an expectation that some structure tidy-up may be required prior to migration to support accurate classification and more successful migration. 19. Has any content auditing or cleansing been carried out? We occasionally use a PowerBI report to review content which can be moved to an archive, however no cleansing has been carried out. Scanning of content currently focuses on preventing breaches against GDPR. 20. Estimation of number and total size of files earmarked for migration. There is current 5M files across the network file servers, however up to 20% may be duplicates base on analysis. The target number of files to be migrated would be based on the information model developed between the potetial supplier and RSSB, which also considers the retention policy and other rules for archival/deletion to be agreed. 21. Response to Q14 (d) - With regard to the MVP implementation, what is: d. Number of folders Total number of folders are approximately 433,043,