Road to Performance Management: Part 1 – Site Architecture

This is Part 1 of a series of articles by Paul Grenier on Performance Management.

Paul is creating a roadmap that can be used to help measure and track project performance. The roadmap includes a series of articles, of which this is the first, and a MindMap for visualizing the road map, which will be include and analyzed in the second article.

This post covers the site architecture and the permission scheme within the roadmap.

Why use SharePoint for Performance Management?

Document Management represents a significant challenge to many organizations. Secure, compliant, and legally binding Document Management (e.g., Performance Management) then becomes a mammoth undertaking. By considering a document’s requirements and role within an organization and applying the correct architectural model in SharePoint, we can achieve outstanding results.

I have identified three main content architecture designs in Microsoft Office SharePoint Server (MOSS) that I use often.

1. Sole Source – the sole source design model uses a single list or library to store content separated by metadata or content type. The metadata or content type allows users to filter for content important to them. Doug Cornelius wrote a great example here. This model works well for a focused group of authors creating public content.

2. Publishing – the publishing model utilizes content types to aggregate content from disparate content repositories. In this scenario, multiple authors with their own list or library contribute to lists of content organized by topic. This model works well for a decentralized group of authors creating public content.

3. Pyramid – the pyramid model utilizes granular permissions to allow disparate authors to create content in a decentralized environment while allowing visibility to users in special permission groups. Content authors only have access to their own content but supervisors have visibility to all authors they manage. This model works well for securing private content among a large, decentralized group of authors while allowing special groups access.

Why not use custom lists, they’re way better than clunky documents?

Documents in SharePoint offer three unique functions we want for successful Performance Management.

First, we have a document previewer for Outlook. We want employees and managers to consider their goals and objectives every day and provide feedback at least weekly. Using Word documents allows our employees to see important performance documents in Outlook, where they already manage email, tasks, and contacts, or on the Performance Management web site.

Second, Word documents allow offline access to Performance Management documents. Managers can put careful thought into each performance document using the best client application tools available. Supervisors and employees who travel will not need to play “catch up” with their performance documents when they return to the office, their current versions will synchronize through Outlook.

Third, documents have the “Send-to” feature enabled out-of-the-box. This feature allows us to setup an audited document repository (in a separate Records Management site collection) to hold old employee assessment documents. We want to keep these documents for legal reasons but our supervisors should not review any document older than one year during the current review period (this reduces bias in the review process).

Pyramid—don’t you mean funnel?

In many applications of MOSS, permissions follow a funnel shape: top-level sites allow large groups of users to access content while lower-level sites restrict permissions to smaller sub-sets of users. This usually serves to protect special permission rights like edit and approve while allowing most users view access to the content.

The pyramid works in the opposite direction and serves to protect all levels of content access. To create a pyramid we rely heavily on SharePoint’s ability to security trim list and library objects based on user context.

Create a document library where only Manager A has access and place document X in that library, only Manager A can read or edit document X. Now, add a folder to that library and add Employee B as a viewer. Employee B can read the contents of the folder but still cannot access document X. The pyramid approach starts with little or no access for most users and gradually relaxes permissions on an as-needed basis.

Why use the “pyramid approach” for Performance Management?

To create a Performance Management application in MOSS we need to use a pyramid approach to the content. The pyramid approach will allow supervisors and
employees to share access to personal performance information while providing valuable data to higher levels of the organization.

At the top of the pyramid, HR and the CEO will share access to all performance-related content. At each level of the organization, individuals will have access to all content produced by the employees they supervise and their own performance-related content. This structure allows the company’s decisionmakers access to performance data at all times while preserving personal privacy among peers.

HR representatives must be included in the highest level of the pyramid to ensure that all performance content adheres to company standards. The high level of visibility into the Performance Management process will help insulate the company from litigation and compliance issues.

Summary

I will continue with this series in the next post by discussing the Performance Management Road Map Guide and answering some common question about the guide. Before then, consider how you might begin to lock down areas of the site to conform to the Pyramid Model vs the Funnel Model.

Paul Grenier
Autosponge – A Non-Developer’s Blog About Administering SharePoint