SharePoint Saturday Los Angeles 2011 SharePoint 2010 as The Business Intelligence Platform
Elevating SharePoint to an Enterprise Platform
-
Upload
perficient-inc -
Category
Technology
-
view
4.534 -
download
2
description
Transcript of Elevating SharePoint to an Enterprise Platform
Elevating SharePoint to an Enterprise Platform
April 2011
Today’s Agenda
8:00am Registration and breakfast served
8:30am Welcome and speaker introductions
8:40am SharePoint Strategic Implementation Planning: Content, Taxonomy and Governance—Arthur Savage, Perficient
9:25am Break9:25am Break
9:30am Unleashing SharePoint’s Full Business Potential with DocAve—Mike Shine, AvePoint
10:15am Break
10:20am Platform Architecture: Defining Inputs, Outputs and Accountability—Micah Swigert, Perficient
11:05am Break
11:10am Proven Practices for Seamless SharePoint 2010 Migration—Mike Shine, AvePoint
11:55am Drawing and closing remarks
About Perficient
• Founded in 1997
• Public, NASDAQ: PRFT
• 2010 Revenue of $215 million
• 18 major market locations throughout North America
– Atlanta, Charlotte, Chicago, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Dallas, Denver, Detroit, Fairfax, Columbus, Dallas, Denver, Detroit, Fairfax, Houston, Indianapolis, Minneapolis, New Orleans, Philadelphia, San Jose, St. Louis and Toronto
• Solution and Industry Based National Practices
• 1,500+ colleagues
• ~490 enterprise clients (2010), 85% repeat business rate
• Alliance partnerships with major technology vendors
• Multiple vendor/industry technology and growth awards
Perficient Microsoft Relationship
• Microsoft NSI Gold Partner with competencies in
– SharePoint – Content Governance, UX, Technical Architecture
– Business Intelligence – Data Architecture, Information Visualization &
Governance
– Digital Marketing – FIS, FAST
– Cloud – Azure, Office 365
– Data Management/Custom Development Solutions
– Business Process and Integration– Business Process and Integration
– Mobility Solutions
– Top 10 Microsoft NSI Partner
– Ranked in top 1% in terms of Performance and Readiness
– Direct Delta Force team engagement
• SharePoint Expertise
– Over 200 SharePoint 2007 (MOSS) implementations completed
– Over 60 SharePoint 2010 implementations completed or in progress
– Over 450 consultants with deep experience with full SharePoint solution life cycle
including: Envisioning Governance, Business Analysis, User Experience, Technical
Architecture, Construction, Testing and Deployment
– Microsoft MVP certified architects & Business Principals that present to industry
conferences, user groups and “SharePoint Saturdays” on a monthly basis
Today’s Presenters
Arthur Savage, PerficientArthur is a Senior Solution Architect at Perficient. He has 20 years of experience in the professional information technology services field with extensive experience in concept design, architecture, documentation, and delivery of SharePoint solutions. His primary focus has been in the Manufacturing, Food Processing, Sports Entertainment and Pharmaceutical sectors.
His broad knowledge and experience designing and deploying SharePoint technologies covers multiple aspects of Information Systems including; collaboration, electronic content management, electronic document management, data records management, security, development and administration. For the past 10 years he has been focused almost exclusively delivering Microsoft administration. For the past 10 years he has been focused almost exclusively delivering Microsoft Office SharePoint Server technologies.
Micah Swigert, PerficientMicah is a Technical Director for Perficient. In this role he is responsible for solution architecture, delivery satisfaction, team management and sales team alignment for all Microsoft-based technology engagements in the Chicago area. Micah comes from a technical background, focused on engaging with clients in enterprise architect, Microsoft subject matter expert, application architect, and lead developer roles. Clients have typically been in the Chicago area and are typically financial services, manufacturing, professional services, and health care firms. Micah has presented at various user groups and other technical groups over the past fifteen years on a variety of Microsoft technical subjects: rich client user experience, layered .NET application architectures, service orientation and .NET capabilities, and integrating SharePoint technologies in custom application development methodologies and best practices.
Today’s Presenters
Michael Shine, AvePoint
Michael Shine is a Systems Engineer, based in AvePoint’s Chicago office, with extensive experience in implementing AvePointsolutions into complex, enterprise-level SharePoint deployments within organizations across numerous verticals. With several years of experience in implementing administration, storage optimization and migration solutions for SharePoint, his optimization and migration solutions for SharePoint, his contributions to the SharePoint community have earned him speaking opportunities at technical conferences, symposiums and user groups throughout North America.
SharePoint Strategic Implementation Planning: Content, Taxonomy & Governance
Arthur Savage, Senior Solution ArchitectPerficient
Agenda
• The Need for Governance
• Defining a Governance Model
Implementing the Governance Model• Implementing the Governance Model
• Information Architecture, Taxonomy and Planning
• Q & A
The Need for Governance
• Align SharePoint strategy with business
objectives
• Oversee business & organizational
transformation
• Establish clear decision-making authority and • Establish clear decision-making authority and
escalation procedures
• Build organizational commitment & sponsorship
• Create continuous and measurable
improvements processes
• Monitor SharePoint investments and the value
that is delivered
Governance
• Structured approach
• Involve Business and IT
• Create infrastructure
– Governance board
– Technical liaison
– Standards
– Technical infrastructure
• Planning
• Prioritizing
Models
Rela
tive V
alu
e
Governance Setup
• Organizational structure – Current state – Candidate structures
– Structure and responsibilities
• Governance • Project roadmap• Project initiation
Rela
tive V
alu
e
• Project initiation • Architecture standards and review • Platform operations and support
• Service offerings • Definitions and use cases • Engagement and funding
• Competency planning • Roles and job descriptions
• Training plans
SharePoint Program Governance / Roles and Responsibilities
SharePoint
Governance
Board
Composed of affected Business and IT associates (Board exists for length of project, but membership can change); responsible for:
Driving initiative team – Project-level governance, key decisions, and issue resolution
Approving designs, plans, and results
Creating business requirements, standards, and governance
SharePoint
Implementation
Team
Responsible for:
Develops technical solution based on business requirements
Executing deployment plans and handling day-to-day project management– Project plans– Budget tracking– Project Reviews
governance
Recommending enforcement policies
Team
Detailed Roles and Responsibilities
Individuals
Role Responsibilities
Executive Owner
Executive Sponsor- Executive responsibility for the project
- Budget and Scope Management
- Project Representation to the Executive
Team
Governance
Board
Business Leadership- Vision, Design, Plans, and Results
- Policy, Procedure, and Issue ResolutionGovernanceBoard
ExecOwner
- Policy, Procedure, and Issue Resolution
- Governance and Key Decisions
- Layout and Structure
Content Owner
Site and sub-site Leadership- Determine Membership- Police Content- Provision Sub-site (team site)
Contributor Create, Update, and Delete Content
Reader Access Content but Cannot Update
Technical Administrator
Technical Administration of:- Configuration
- Standards and Security
- Policies and Procedures
- Provisioning
- Maintenance and Backup
Contributor
Board
Users
Technical Administration
Reader
ContentOwner
Governance Board
Strategic - Example
John Smith Beth Smith
CEO
Vision & Goals
CIO
Joe Davis
Service Delivery
Linda Baum
Prod MgmtApp Development
Alan MacDonald
Communications
StrategyHR/ LegaTechnical Svcs Finance
Sridhar Gupta
Gregg Smith
2-4 hours per quarter
2-4 hours per
Content Owners
SharePoint Technology Team
TaxonomyDocument Management
Development
??Technology Lead
Security
SharePoint Strategy
SharePoint Roadmap
Z Project Sponsor
Z Project
Y Project Sponsor
Y Project
X Project Sponsor
X Project
??Technical Architect
??Information Architect
Development Teams
Standards & Guidelines
Approved Projects
SharePoint Program Mgt
per month
Implementation
• Governance should be part of an overall Roadmap
• Governance should be included in the Foundation and in all phases
• Governance IS an ongoing effort• Governance IS an ongoing effort
– Departments may change depending on project mix
– Key roles will not changes
– Best practices will not change
The creation of a taxonomy provides
• A way to categorize content, allowing access to corporate content through simple and complex keyword searches
• A key initial step in an overall enterprise content
Taxonomy
• A key initial step in an overall enterprise content management strategy
• A system architecture, document definitions and document relationships are developed right the first time
Content Taxonomy
Content Types and Attributes
Content Types
Content Type Parent Content Type
Content Columns
Content Types Type Lessee Vendor Meeting TypeVendor Contract
Type
CBE
Type
First Source
Type
Site Architecture
Site
ArchitectureContent Types Security
Site Name Site Type Sub-Site WebpartsDocument
LibraryFolder
Project Team Structure
E x e c u t iv e S p o n s o r
P r o g r a m O f f ic e
C o r e T e a m
G o v e r n a n c e B o a r d
B u s / U X A n a l y s t s
S e n io r B u s in e s s
A n a l y s t
T e c h n ic a lA r c h it e c t
D e v e lo p e r s
E x t e n d e d T e a m
Information Architecture
Upgrade Cycle Overview
Minimum Software Requirements
Minimum Hardware Requirements
SharePoint 2010 Upgrade Tool
Visibility into upgrade process and potential problems
SharePoint 2010 Upgrade Methods
• In-place upgrade
– Previous version is overwritten
– Sites are unavailable
– Same URLs after upgrade
• Database attach
– Content DBs supported– Content DBs supported
– Config and search cannot be attached
• Hybrid approach
– Detach DBs
– Upgrade to 2010 in-place
– DB Attach Content DBs
• Visual upgrade
– A feature that seperates data upgrade from UI upgrade
• Third-party migration tools
– Quest, etc.
Q&A
SharePoint Platform Architecture: Defining Inputs, Outputs and Accountability
Micah Swigert, Director, Microsoft Chicago DeliveryPerficient
Agenda
• Considering SharePoint as a platform
• Defining inputs to technical architecture
• Creating outputs using models
• Defining outputs• Defining outputs
What is SharePoint
• It’s a set of products and frameworks built on ASP.NET and SQL Server
• It’s a horizontal portal solution
• It’s that pie thing
• It’s a platform for web-based business applications
– Out-of-box sites
– Created by end users
– Created by developers/IT
– Purchased from a third party and implemented
How It Starts
• Typical:
– Got it with EA, wanted to use it because we already paid for it
– End users wanted to collaborate on documents, calendar, tasks, etc.documents, calendar, tasks, etc.
– Bought a product that needed it
• Then:
– A “point solution” gets implemented
– It succeeds or it doesn’t
How It Starts
• If it succeeds
– “What else can we do with this”
– “How do we manage it?”
• If it doesn’t
Lack of interest – moving on– Lack of interest – moving on
Desert Jungle
Inputs
• Information architecture
– Site hierarchy
– Taxonomy
• Governance plan
– Who, how– Who, how
– Strategic growth plans, vision
• Requirements visualization
• Specific application requirements
Defining Meta-Models
• As architects, we build models
• To guide us, we use
– Templates—reuse successful models
– Platforms—reduce parameters/options, provide features
– Models– Models
• Meta-models are models we can use as architects to create our output: models
“SharePoint makes 80% of what you need to do easy… it makes the 20% [almost] impossible”
• Treat SharePoint as a platform, not as a framework for custom ASP.NET applicationsframework for custom ASP.NET applications
• How do you architect for platforms vs. applications?
The Driver-Constraint Model
• Define the “driver”
Business, Technical, Organizational
– What is it that the stakeholders want to do?
– What is the expected lifetime?
Who are the constituents?– Who are the constituents?
• Define the “constraints”Business, Technical, Organizational
– Who is going to maintain?
– What level of customization?
– Existing infrastructure, limitations
The Driver-Constraint Model
Drivers
• Be able to quickly spin up simple team sites
Constraints
• No one on staff to administer SharePoint
• Be able to quickly spin up simple team sites
• Be able to share quotes and invoices with select customers
• Have a place for basic forms, policies, procedures, company news, etc.
• No one on staff to administer SharePoint
• Business owners may not want to do site owner tasks
• Limited SQL backup capabilities
• SharePoint sizing rules
Functional Map
Foundation
Site
(Doc Libs,
Calendars,
Tasks)
Publishing
Site
Search Social
(Blogs /
Wiki /
MySites)
Customized (Assembled)
Applications
BI Web
Databases
Form /
Workflow
Intranet
Team
Sites
Extranet
Public
Sites
Consensus Before Planning
• http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc261834.aspx
• ONCE you have completed:
– Driver/constraint– Driver/constraint
– Functional map
– And gotten consensus
Outputs
• Plan for
– Browser support, client
– Sites and solutions
– Security (authentication, authorization)
– Availability and scalability– Availability and scalability
– Performance and load
– Contingency / disaster recovery
• Technet has great examples
Outputs
Users
Zones and
authentication
Server farm
Admin site
Services
Customershttp://www.fabrikam.com
Front-end
Web servers
Application
server
Clustered or mirrored
database servers
running SQL Server
Web application:Central Administration Site
Application Pool 1Front-end
Web Servers
Application
server
Clustered or mirrored
database servers
running SQL Server
Web application:Central Administration Site
Application Pool 1
Load Balancer
IntranetDefaultExtranet
Internal employeesRemote employeesIndividual partnershttp://fabrikam
http://team
http://my
http://partnerweb
http://fabrikamsite (authoring)
https://intranet.fabrikam.com
https://team.fabrikam.com
https://my.fabrikam.com
https://remotepartnerweb.fabrikam.com
https://fabrikamsite.fabrikam.com (authoring)
https://partnerweb.fabrikam.com
Load Balancer
Internet
Directory — Corporate directory
Authentication type:
UAG, TMG, or ISA — Forms-based authentication
SharePoint — NTLM or Kerberos
Directory — Active Directory Domain Services (AD DS)
Authentication type:
UAG, TMG, or ISA — Forms-based authentication
SharePoint — NTLM or Kerberos (same as internal employee)
Directory — AD DS
Authentication — Integrated Windows (Kerberos or NTLM)
Anonymous authentication
Application Pool 2
IIS Web Site—“SharePoint Web Services”
Unpartitioned services Application Pool B
IIS Web Site—“SharePoint Web Services”
Partitioned services
Unpartitioned
Application Pool 4
Web application: Team Sites
Zone Load-Balanced URL
Default
Intranet http://teams
https://teams.fabrikam.com
Default
Intranet http://teams/sites/Team1http://teams/sites/Team2
http://teams/sites/Team3
https://teams.fabrikam.com/sites/Team1https://teams.fabrikam.com/sites/Team2
https://teams.fabrikam.com/sites/Team3
Web application: My Sites
http://my
http://my/personal/<site_name>Team1 Team2 Team3
http://teams
App pools
Web applications
Site collections
Sites
Content databases
Zones and
URLs
Policies
Zone Team Sites
Zone Policies
Default
Intranet Partner accounts = Deny All
Partner accounts = Deny All
Zone Load-Balanced URL
Default
Intranet http://my
https://my.fabrikam.com
Default
Intranet http://my/personal/User1http://my/personal/User2
http://my/personal/User3
https://my.fabrikam.com/personal/User1
https://my.fabrikam.com/personal/User2
https://my.fabrikam.com/personal/User3
Zone Self-Service Sites
Web application: Partner Web
Application Pool 5
Project1 Project2 Project3
http://partnerweb/sites
Zone Policies
Default
Intranet Partner accounts = Deny All
Partner accounts = Deny All
Zone Load-Balanced URL
Default
Intranet http://partnerweb
https://remotepartnerweb.fabrikam.com
Default
Intranet http://partnerweb/sites/Project1
http://partnerweb/sites/Project2
http://partnerweb/sites/Project3
https://remotepartnerweb.fabrikam.com/sites/Project1https://remotepartnerweb.fabrikam.com/sites/Project2
https://remotepartnerweb.fabrikam.com/sites/Project3
Zone Partner Web Sites
Extranet https://partnerweb.fabrikam.com
Extranet https://partnerweb.fabrikam.com/sites/Project1https://partnerweb.fabrikam.com/sites/Project2
https://partnerweb.fabrikam.com/sites/Project3
Web application: Published Intranet Content
Application Pool 3
HR Facilities Purchasing
http://fabrikam
Zone Load-Balanced URL
Default
Intranet http://fabrikam
https://intranet.fabrikam.com
Default
Intranet http://fabrikam
http://fabrikam/hrhttp://fabrikam/facilities
http://fabrikam/purchasing
Zone Published Intranet Sites
Zone Policies
Default
Intranet
https://intranet.fabrikam.com
https://intranet.fabrikam.com/hrhttps://intranet.fabrikam.com/facilities
https://intranet.fabrikam.com/purchasing
Partner accounts = Deny All
Partner accounts = Deny All
Authoring site
collection
Web application: Company Internet Site
Application Pool 6
Products Services Support
http://www.fabrikam.com
Zone Load-Balanced URL
Internet http://www.fabrikam.com
Default
Intranet http://fabrikamsite
Zone Load-balanced URL— Administrative
Zone Policies
Default
Intranet
https://fabrikamsite.fabrikam.com
Production site
collection
Internet All users = Deny Write
Authors = Full Control
Testers = Deny Write
Authors = Full ControlTesters = Deny Write
Content deployment
Default group
Managed Metadata
Access Service
Visio Graphics Service
Excel Calculation Services
Word Services
Word Viewing
PowerPointSecure Store Service
Business Data Connectivity
Search User Profile
Search
Web Analytics
Web Analytics
Managed Metadata
services
Partitioned by project in the Partner Web site collection
Managed Metadata
Subscription Settings
Search Unpartitioned instance for the published content
Default group
Custom group
Zone Policies
None
Database settings:
Target size per database = 200 gigabytes (GB)
Site size limits per site = 30 GB
Reserved for second-stage recycle bin = 10%Maximum number of sites = 6
Site level warning = 5
Database settings:
Target size per database = 200 GB
Storage quota per site = 5 GB
Maximum number of sites = 40
Authoring and Staging site collections hosted in dedicated databases
Database settings:
Target size per database = 200 gigabytes (GB)
Database settings:
Target size per database = 175 gigabytes (GB)
Site size limits per site = 1 GB
Reserved for second-stage recycle bin = 15%
Maximum number of sites = 180
Site level warning = 150
© 2010 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. To send feedback about this documentation, please write to us at [email protected].
Strive for Accountability
• Technical architecture depends on the quality of its inputs
• We can use the drivers/constraints model and functional map to elicit inputs (along with governance, etc.)governance, etc.)
• If you get consensus, you need to be able to deliver
• Accountability through ability to maintain SLAs
Thoughts
• Be deliberate with constraints
– Your constraints may prescribe a different model
– May open up alternative deployment scenarios
• Hosting
• Office 365• Office 365
• Limit customizations
• Push for clear drivers, watch for driver creep
• Push for a clear governance plan
General Technical Guidelines
• Avoid multiple content databases per application
– Unless you have a solid strategy for site collection partitioning
– Unless you have a high-capacity storage scenario
• Consider multiple applications (process isolation), • Consider multiple applications (process isolation), especially for heavily customized applications
• Use a dedicated SQL Server environment
• Consider dedicated, fault-tolerant load balancing early—both internal and external
Contact Information
Arthur Savage
Micah Swigert
twitter: @micahswigert