EndUserSharePoint.com: Five Ways to Manage a SharePoint Site Collection with SharePoint
Site Collection Management – Contracted View
:
- Setup a protected subsite at the top level of your site collection to track the management of your site collection. This subsite is called Site Collection Project Management. The area is a Publishing subsite used to manage, document and archive the processes and procedures for your site collection. It should only be accessible to the team that is managing the site collection
: - Create customized lists to act as request forms for subsites and libraries. Using Bob Mixon’s “Theory of Lockdown” (my term, not his), site managers can not create their own subsites, sites must be requested through the site collection administrators. Instead of doing this through email, a customized list is setup to handle the requests.
: - Setup a blog to handle messages from the Project Manager to the team. Categories of the blog include Scope Change, Risk Assessment, Weekly Updates, PM Messages and General Observations. The Scope Change category is exposed through a Content Query Web Part at the entrance of the management area.
: - Develop a Wiki to document the policies, procedures and processes for managing the site collection. This is critical. Corporate Memory is one of the most difficult things to manage as teams change and time removes the memory of why certain things were done. This should include documentation on site content types, default permissions, site structure, storage types, data types and how these decisions were made.
: - Build KPIs (Key Performance Indicators) against the subsite request list to measure how many subsites have been requested, how many subsites have been created and how many subsite requests are still open. The KPI list is exposed as part of the Dashboard of the Site Collection Management entrance.
Obviously, this is not a comprehensive list, but setting up these basic five items and using them for the daily management of your site collection will allow for a relatively easy handoff when you are ready to move on to another project or training new help because your implementation has become so successful.
The image at the top of this page is a contracted view of the Site Collection Management area with very little detail showing. The diagram is WAY too large to include with this post (1200 x 2200).
I will include a full sized image of the detailed and expanded Site Collection Management image in the Weekly Newsletter coming out this Wednesday. If you would like a full sized copy of the diagram, you can subscribe right here. For those already subscribed, you’ll get the diagram along with the second installment of SharePoint 101: Tricks and Traps.
The fully expanded diagram includes a detailed view of:
- Base – Request Content Type
- Extended Content Types
- Lookup Lists
- Lookup Relationships
- Resource Libraries
- Process Documentation Pages
- Site Management Request Forms
- KPI Lists
- KPI Linkage
Small Section of Expanded View
Mark,
This is a very interesting approach to governance. I agree with the majority of the suggestions in the list, but I have to play the role of an antagonist on point 2, “Theory of lockdown”. Doesn’t this take away some of the power of SharePoint for end users?
Could you (or Bob, if you’re reading) elaborate more on the reason this is a good approach?
Thanks!
Chris – On the contrary, it actually makes it easier for the End User as the site structure starts to expand.
The idea is that when a site collection is created, people must request a site within the site collection. The site collection administrator now has a chance to talk with the person requesting the site, help educate them in how sites should be structured and begin the needs analysis for site collection level content types.
As you well know from your experience, cutting an End User loose with a new site and saying “Go for it!” is a recipe for disaster.
The “Theory of Lockdown” suggests incrementally loosening the restrictions as the End Users become more conversant in the platform.
Yes, initially it creates an exponentially larger load for the Site Collection Administrator, but in the long run I think you will find for maintenance of structured information and site usability, this is the way to go.
Mark
Been doing the lockdown since 2003. 2007 kind of makes it harder since you have more deny capability under 2003 then 2007.
Another bonus of doing this is that master pages can get set correctly along with the creation of security groups, not using exchange 2007 and creation of domain security groups is politics. Also it helps prevent “orphan sites” sites that get created because we can then never used after that.
We use a permission level call Owners Permissions which gives everything but themes(people where picking ones management did not like) and create sites capability. Owners get assigned to that, I try to avoid the defaults groups unless there is a need.
Workspaces seem to cause problems with users, they question why they are different so I avoid them. The people that understand them and have a use are told to create them under MySite where they have full permissions.
The workload is not that much after the initial setup and makes it easier then hitting a site and wondering why they are using a meeting workspace as a collaberation site.
Will – You touch on an interesting topic when you mention Permission Levels.
There’s an ego thing happening that makes people want the title of “Site Manager”. Many times this is requested by people who have no training or experience with SharePoint but want all of the power of a “Site Manager”.
With Permission Levels, we can build a level called “Site Manager” that does not allow the creation of subsites. They get the ego boost of having the title which is a step above Contributor, they have the ability to create lists/libraries, you keep control of sites through the request form at the top of your site collection and everyone is happy.
Mark
Hi Mark/Chris,
Thought I would jump in here! :)
First and foremost, it has been my experience that having a site creation request process is an absolute must. However, it is only needed for the controlled site collections. In most organizations, you will have a minimum of two site collections; i.e. the controlled side which is the Intranet and another for collaboration (what I refer to as the wild, wild west).
A site creation process adds a great deal of value in more than one way.
The first is simply controlling the information needed to create a new site. Force the user to provide all the needed information up front; this reduces the number of communication touch-points you will have with that user.
The second is to provide you with a means of quickly determining if the requester is in fact capable of managing/administering a new site. In many occasions, I will recommend storing information about who has successfully taken different SharePoint training classes. If a requester has successfully passed the site administration course, the new site is provisioned automatically; without human intervention. Otherwise, the user is provided information about where to obtain the appropriate education.
The third reason for the site creation request is to simply drive awareness at the governing council levels. I have found that walking into a corporate governance council meeting with a list of 300 site creation requests gets attention. Its one thing to inform management of the viral impact SharePoint is having in an organization and anther to have proof of it!
Again, these are just a few of the reasons I have found this approach to be of value!
This is great stuff Mark, thank you for posting it! I will follow up with a blog post that further explains my thoughts on the topic!
Bob Mixon
http://www.BobMixon.com
http://www.MixonConsulting.com
Bob – You are always welcome to Guest Post. I think the EndUserSharePoint.com audience could deal with a good dose of your Information Architecture medicine.
Regards,
Mark
Mark, Will and Bob,
Thank you so much! I just wanted to pose the question in case some one out there was thinking, “but that totally kills my idea of SharePoint.”
I agree, having strong central governance really helps the overall plan and improves the adoption rate. As many others have experienced, we have struggled with how much the end user gets to do in the SharePoint environment. We want them to be able to do as much as possible, but we don’t want to replicate the problems that already exist. I think most would agree that the biggest challenge in information management is educating the users so they don’t make the same mistakes over and over again! The last thing we want is to have the nightmare of network shares replicated in SharePoint (now I’m not going to sleep well tonight).
Thank you for bringing up those points Bob! It gives me more ammunition for the argument of both training and empowerment! As the users know more, we can let them DO more… and that’s exciting!
Chris
Hi Chris,
You are welcome.
Use governance to your advantage. This can be accomplished through multiple Site Collections. Create a Site Collection for your controlled Intranet and one for your Collaboration environment. Set the appropriate usage expectation through communications and governance and you will have great success!
I am almost ready to publish another article on uses of Site Collections. It is in the review process now. Should be released today!
Bob Mixon
http://www.BobMixon.com
http://www.MixonConsulting.com
I must say I’m in the “locked down” camp as well. I find users just create sites willy-nilly without any thought for structure, access and so on, leaving me as the site administrator to try and sort it all out!
One of the big questions I have for them is what do they need a new site for? In addition to your “when to use a list, when to use a library” tip, users often are unclear as to when a new site is required and when a simple list or library on an existing site would be just as good!
I like the admin site idea and will be putting one together shortly. However as a WSS 2003 user – it’ll be about 12 months before we get 2007 in my organisation :( – I’ll need to manage without the Workflow, but will at least be able to put the lists etc into place.
Great debate to have – thanks for starting it!!
Adam
PS Is the big version of the diagram coming in a later newsletter or did I miss it in this one?
Adam – Whoops, you got me. It was such are large project to get the second installment of the book finished that I completely forgot about the diagram. I’ll have it loaded into the Weekly Newsletter download area by the end of the day.
Thanks,
Mark
Adam – I have decided to include the diagram with the Content Types installment next week. Knowing Content Types is critical to understanding what the diagram is conveying.
I think it will be worth the wait to get it right.
Mark
Great stuff!
My organisation has just finished a logical architecture very similar to the one given by Microsoft (see Investing in Logical Architectural Design Samples, application Pools 4 and 5) where the Intranet is a Portal Site Collection, HR has it’s own Site Collection, IT Does etc, departments beneath. Is this overkill on anything other than a very large organisation or a logical way to arrange an Intranet site for future expansion.
Colin – No, it’s not necessarily overkill, but might not be appropriate for your situation. Do an analysis of what type of content is needed on your site and then categorize it to see what types of areas are needed.
If the entire body of content needs access to itself through cross-referencing, you will want to keep it under one site collection, since web parts can’t “talk” across site collection.
This means you will build subsites for each major content area… HR, Finance, etc. You might consider a seperate site collection for something like the IT department, since generally their data isn’t something that should be exposed to the entire company.
Hope that helps,
Mark