I have been through a handful of SharePoint trainings and you are the first to mention that document libraries are intended for a signal type of content! This is super helpful and will help me to restructure our document control so that it is more user friendly and even easier to set up some of my automated workflows. I was trying very hard to merge content types thinking a document library was an overarching repository for documents.
I disagree with that approach that this guy is talking about; the "different libraries for different purposes". Document libraries should be used for a multitude of purposes, so that people can collaborate. That's the whole power of the meta-data approach. They should support everybody who is collaborating on the repository of documents. Document libraries can handle multiple different types of content. Sounds like this guy doesn't understand the value of 'Content Types' in SharePoint; you can control what columns are required and seen by each content type. For example your software guys might care about a Jira-ID column, and your Testing guys might care about a Test-ID column. Set up a minimum number of libraries (I try to use 1-and-only-1 for the department) and a minimal number of Content Types. Easier to maintain and audit, easier to collaborate. The key purpose for creating disconnected libraries and sights is PERMISSIONS. If you want to handle permissions, handle them at the highest possible level, ideally at a site level. If that's not fine enough, then at a Library level. Still easy enough to manage. My views would never show more than 5000 items, because as soon as you've narrowed down by a couple of fields, you're already in a manageably small number of documents. E.g. a 'Testing' department going to produce more than 5000 'Test Specifications'? Not for many, many years.
This is one of the best webinar on SharePoint Record Management & Document Management side.. Of all the SharePoint Online values, ECM or Record Management is probably the least interesting as against collaboration etc as there are not much of materials available on this.. Thanks for this and happy to know more on advanced concepts on these areas. I'm looking to prove SharePoint Online is a best fit for Document Management against OpenText and this video gave me lot of insights on it. Thanks again! Pl do share if you have any additional material on this.
So three points for clarification if I can get a response, how does moving a document with content type break record traceability as I thought the content type maintained the metadata within the document itself even to load in on a different library with content type. Also to confirm even with content types it sounds like the recommendation here is one content or document type to a library, is this correct? Also is it possible to get the meat of the document you use for SharePoint projects as a template to follow for our own? I see the slides are loaded and shared. Thanks
This is quite eye opening, glad I found it. Thank you for the indepth content. You have a lot of information being shown in your slides but its hard to read (e.g. Deparmentment structure). Do you provide the slides anywhere?
I have been through a handful of SharePoint trainings and you are the first to mention that document libraries are intended for a signal type of content! This is super helpful and will help me to restructure our document control so that it is more user friendly and even easier to set up some of my automated workflows. I was trying very hard to merge content types thinking a document library was an overarching repository for documents.
I disagree with that approach that this guy is talking about; the "different libraries for different purposes".
Document libraries should be used for a multitude of purposes, so that people can collaborate. That's the whole power of the meta-data approach. They should support everybody who is collaborating on the repository of documents.
Document libraries can handle multiple different types of content. Sounds like this guy doesn't understand the value of 'Content Types' in SharePoint; you can control what columns are required and seen by each content type. For example your software guys might care about a Jira-ID column, and your Testing guys might care about a Test-ID column.
Set up a minimum number of libraries (I try to use 1-and-only-1 for the department) and a minimal number of Content Types. Easier to maintain and audit, easier to collaborate.
The key purpose for creating disconnected libraries and sights is PERMISSIONS. If you want to handle permissions, handle them at the highest possible level, ideally at a site level. If that's not fine enough, then at a Library level. Still easy enough to manage.
My views would never show more than 5000 items, because as soon as you've narrowed down by a couple of fields, you're already in a manageably small number of documents. E.g. a 'Testing' department going to produce more than 5000 'Test Specifications'? Not for many, many years.
This is one of the best webinar on SharePoint Record Management & Document Management side.. Of all the SharePoint Online values, ECM or Record Management is probably the least interesting as against collaboration etc as there are not much of materials available on this.. Thanks for this and happy to know more on advanced concepts on these areas.
I'm looking to prove SharePoint Online is a best fit for Document Management against OpenText and this video gave me lot of insights on it. Thanks again! Pl do share if you have any additional material on this.
So three points for clarification if I can get a response, how does moving a document with content type break record traceability as I thought the content type maintained the metadata within the document itself even to load in on a different library with content type. Also to confirm even with content types it sounds like the recommendation here is one content or document type to a library, is this correct? Also is it possible to get the meat of the document you use for SharePoint projects as a template to follow for our own? I see the slides are loaded and shared. Thanks
This is quite eye opening, glad I found it. Thank you for the indepth content.
You have a lot of information being shown in your slides but its hard to read (e.g. Deparmentment structure). Do you provide the slides anywhere?
Thanks for watching! We have the slides shared from this page: www.gravityunion.com/events/2022/07/spo-for-rm