Blogs

Though conventional wisdom holds that “less is more,” in content and process management circles, the converse is equally true.

This pithy thought arose while reading an article published yesterday on BizCommunity.com, which correctly identified some pitfalls associated with using more than one records management service provider. Author Richard Buttle’s points are well taken, and are equally and entirely applicable to any sort of third-party offering, including the cloud-based ECM and BPM/BPO services that dominate so much of our thinking here.

What’s interesting is that the broader notion of “more is less” is suitable for framing in other areas of our profession as well. For instance:

- “More records” do not equal better documentation, and in fact represent a legal risk that is fairly readily avoided.

- “More automation” do not equal better processes, and in fact can make matters worse by intensifying the existing inefficiencies.

- “More metatags” do not equal better search/retrieval, and in fact can degrade speed and accuracy by returning results that are at once too lengthy and potentially incomplete.

There are many more examples than just these, but I’m sure you get the gist and can map it to the broader point: that simply having or doing more of something is no guarantee of achieving better outcomes – and can actually have the reverse effect. Or, put another way,

More can be less, just as less can be more.