Is SharePoint a good fit for an association? What about a charity? Should a non profit be using SharePoint? The typical consultant answer is “it depends.”
First, let’s oversimplify SharePoint. SharePoint is software used to build websites. That’s it.
However, SharePoint is more than just a single-purpose web site tool. It’s a platform that you can use build your Intranet, extranet, private social network, professional network, search engine, and public-facing website. It’s more than just a web content management system, blogging system, wikie, or document sharing interface. Once you and your team knows a little bit about SharePoint, you can focus on doing your job and less on learning and supporting niche applications and tools.
Sean and I finally finished our book: SharePoint for Nonprofits: The Definitive Guide to SharePoint for your Nonprofit, Association, Charity, and .ORG. We actually finished it during the week of Thanksgiving 2010, but I’m finally getting around to chatting about it.
There are hundreds of really great SharePoint books already out there that cover the admin and code level stuff. This book is NOT about installing SharePoint or writing code. SharePoint for Nonprofits provides details about leveraging specific needs of trade associations, membership societies, volunteer organizations, and other nonprofit associations, charities and .orgs; and how SharePoint might be used to satisfy some of these needs.
SharePoint 2010 is great, but what are the Top 5 enhancements or new features that are available in SharePoint 2010? Everyone who works with SharePoint will have their own Top 5 lists.
That’s right. You can use the free version of SharePoint 2010 to run your public facing website. SharePoint Foundation 2010 is free. SharePoint Foundation 2010 may be a good fit to run your public facing website. In order to look at this in a completely scientific manner, realize that there are literally hundreds of web content management systems out there (see CMS Matrix). In reality, I see about 10 CMS platforms in use. There are the commercial platforms (SharePoint, SiteCore, Ektron are the most frequently used ones) and there are a couple of free options (WordPress, Drupal, Joomla, Plone are pretty common). I would be very surprised if anyone was able to find a single CMS platform that is all things to all people, but I wanted to present SharePoint Foundation as an option for running a FREE CMS platform. Even if you knew that there is a free version of SharePoint, what most people don’t realize is that SharePoint Foundation is a great option for running web sites of all kinds – not just team sites. It is a great option for many reasons, but in reality it is supported by Microsoft (not just a community or a small fly-by-night company), it is FREE, and it is extremely easy to get started. SharePoint is also quite large. The ecosystem of users, authors, conferences, blogs, communities, and so much more. From a functionality perspective – it’s hard to beat SharePoint. Even the free version, SharePoint Foundation, offers simple data connectivity (through BCS), cross browser support, accessibility, support for Office Web Apps, blogs, wikis, templates, document support, health analyzer, support for presence, and MUCH more.
In order to show some of the completely of what comes with this free version of SharePoint 2010, I thought it would make sense to use Wikipedia. Doesn’t everyone use Wikipedia as a credible source? It is WIKIPEDIA, after all.
Wikipedia shows that a web content management system typically has the following components:
This is one of the biggest strengths of SharePoint. It is a platform. I’ve been a SharePoint evangelist for a few years now, and one of the most important facts about SharePoint is the full feature set of the platform. I read the Gartner Magic Quadrant for Web Content Management, August 2010, last night. I’m most curious about the cautions Gartner lists about each vendor in the quadrant. The cautions are really not issues or technical shortcomings, but rather politically correct adspeak indicating cautionary yellow flags that CIOs should at least ask the question about.
In regards to SharePoint, one of the cautions listed basically paraphrased what I continue to preach as one of the biggest strengths of the platform. Decision makers will have to “make a trade-off between investing in a strategic platform, covering multiple touch points of their organization, and the need for greater responsiveness in a market whose dynamism continues to increase.”
Really? Make a decision between a strategic platform that is well-suited for the entire enterprise or pick a niche application that will serve a single use for a very short window before needing replaced? Hmmmm…. What would you do?
Microsoft has some pretty good information posted about the hardware and software requirements necessary for SharePoint 2010. I still get asked for real world, or ‘best practices’, recommendations all the time. Like everyone else, I want to get the best performance for the best price. It’s difficult to strike the balance between ‘good enough’ and ‘optimized’.
A large majority of the SharePoint projects that I work on end up being small-ish SharePoint farms (between 2 and 8 servers). Due to the licensing required for Windows, SQL Servers, and SharePoint servers, most organizations do try to get by with as few servers as possible, yet still want the best possible performance. The most common configuration that I see in the SharePoint world involves a single dedicated SharePoint server and a single dedicated SQL Server. From there, organizations usually first add another SharePoint server, then a 3rd SharePoint server, then a second SQL Server, and then the sky is literally the limit.