mam mistakes short report

8/7/2019 MAM Mistakes Short Report

1/8

The 10 Worst Mistakes

Media Asset ManagementProjects Make

A report by John WilliamsWith findings from MAM experts at

ITN, BBC , IBM, HP , Ardendo, Artesia & others


2/8

MAM Mistakes Short Report V1.1 John Williams 2007 www.theNewBroadcast.com Page 2 of 8

Whats the Worst Mistake a MAM Project Can Make?Media Asset Management technologies are at the very heart of the current transformation ofbroadcast towards the new vision of delivering tapeless content in multiple forms to multipleplatforms. All too often however, broadcast MAM projects do not live up to their potential.

So why is it that so many MAM projects run late, go over budget, or fail to deliver the projectedbenefits? This report answers that question by presenting the insights of broadcasters, product vendorsand consultants who have first-hand experience. It is the result of an independent research projectcontributed to by experts at I TN, the BBC, IBM, HP, Ardendo, Artesia and many others.

About The AuthorThe report was compiled by John Williams of EG Consultancy and TheNewBroadcast.com fromresearch conducted at the end of last year. John drew up a list of the 10 most significant mistakes MAMprojects make based on 16 years experience in broadcast technology. Invitations were then sent toBroadcasters, product vendors, and consultancies involved with MAM projects to rank the severity ofthe suggested mistakes and add comments from their own experience.

This report is your chance to find out what they said.

No one knows your project better than you

Report author John Willi ams writes:Youll read plenty of opinions on the following pages but the fact is that no one knows your particularproject better than you. Thats why I now prefer to work with broadcast professionals as an executivecoach to help you find your own solutions to the issues that arise in your projects and your team.

Are any of these familiar to you in your work?

Shifting project requirements

Conflicting demandsExcessive workload

Change management headaches

Team issuesConstant interruptions

If so, executive coaching will help you find creative solutions and get them faster than you can onyour own.

The best way to appreciate how executive coaching can help you is to experience it. See the end of thereport to find out how you can arrange to try out executive coaching for yourself.

Imagine this

An hour or more carved out of your week to do the long term thinking every project orteam needs. A chance finally to take a break from the fire-fighting and get some perspective aided by a qualified coach and broadcast systems expert

A confidential sounding board of someone who (unlike everyone else in yourorganisation) has no agenda for you beyond seeing you succeed.

The understanding and the insights of a consultant with 16 years experience inbroadcast systems and projects.

Most importantly, youll leave each session with a timetable of the criti cal actions that willsave you hours of time, improve the performance of your team, and help you avoid the problemstypical of large scale technology projects like MAM.
http://www.thenewbroadcast.com/http://www.thenewbroadcast.com/


3/8


The Mistakes

The mistakes MAM projects make are listed here in decreasing order of severity as voted for by theresearch contributors. Each mistake includes my opinion on the issue as John says and is followedby the opinions of the contributors.

This shorter report contains the first 5 mistakes . The full report contains 5 more mistakes thatMAM projects make plus additional mistakes suggested by contributors. Its free and available nowfrom www.thenewbroadcast.com .

#1 Mistake:Implementing new technology and processes without change managementJohn says: When implementing new technologies with wide impact on processes, businesschange management becomes a key factor in the projects success. This is not just training buta communication and support strategy to foster buy-in and turn around resistance to the new

systems, particularly amongst the creative staff.

This mistake was voted by participants as most critical of all with near universal agreement of theimportance of business change management to a MAM project. It was described as a very very criticalmistake even by product vendors. Surprisingly this mistake came above concerns about reliability,broadcast functionality, and vendor longevity.

Richard Eberhart , director of the Global Society of Asset Management goes so far as to say that, MAM has more to do with Change Management than new technology and explains thatThere must be top level support for any MAM initiative with internal Power Users that can help driveadoption. The key is to start small, learn and grow over time. Trying to solve the whole problem atonce is a recipe for disaster .

Forcing complex new systems on staff can undoubtedly becounter-productive. Peter Thomas of T.BITE Consultingcommented that job profiles, required skill sets andworkflows may change massively therefore as onebroadcaster put it Buy-in is essential , otherwise energy iswasted on persuading staff to adopt new processes.

I consulted on one project where a broadcaster had invested in a tapeless newsroom production systemand installed it without consultation with its users. The result is that the users instinctively applied theirold processes around the new technology. Not only did this throw out some of the possible efficienciesthe new system could have made but this actually reduced productivity in some areas.

The problem however is that as Tom Wragg of Media Asset Capital warned, Change management ispoorly understood, not just by clients but also by suppliers as well . Glen Hall of HP agreed that Broadcast is good at absorbing new technology, though poor at new process. As mediaconvergence progresses, traditional IT experts are having to learn from Broadcasters about the specialdemands of our industry; change management is one area where we can learn from the IT industry whoare familiar with the challenges of implementing wide-reaching technologies with many users.

This mistake is closely linked to the next one about process change.

Pre-empt the people issues around your project with Executive Coaching see page 8

MostCriticalMistake

Broadcast is good atabsorbing new technology,

poor at new processGlen Hall, HP
http://www.thenewbroadcast.com/http://www.thenewbroadcast.com/http://www.thenewbroadcast.com/


4/8


2nd Mistake: I mplementing new technology without process changeJohn says The real benefits of a technology like MAM are in the workflow changes. Implementingnew technology without reengineering the processes around it may even reduce productivity.

As a broadcaster put it New technology can speed up existing processes (eg 1 man does 4 men'swork), but MAM provides an opportunity to revamp processes. This could include convergingworkflows, parallelising tasks, automating processes, changing work tasks and their sequence, anddeveloping new disciplines such as cataloguing content with metadata. Another broadcaster confirmsthis; From workflow analysis conducted for tapeless production, the process is everything

Peter Thomas of T.BITE Consulting said The same technologycan be overwhelmingly successful in one broadcaster and be adisaster in another. Success critically depends on business processre-engineering to optimally leverage technology

However, not all participants agreed that a successful project focused on changing processes. As KeithCass, Director of Technology at ITN said you may have very efficient workflow that a MAM projectmay need to flex into. Process change is vitally important but it works both ways.

The extent of process change also clearly depends on the scope of the project impact as Niall Duffy ofIBM explained: I have seen cases where technology driven systems have in fact had a negativeROI because of lack of adoption, or reduced productivity. However, for pure archive it may be thecase that there is a good case for supporting existing processes, through reduced tape stock, storage,maintenance and enabling greater access

On a more practical note, Russell Grute from TSL reminds us that any process change depends on theability of key sub systems (eg servers and networks) to deliver the expected workflow improvements .

Besides which, a MAM project may not even get the green light without considering process changes inadvance as Glenn Hall of HP explains; No DAM can be signed off by an FD without a very clear

business logic and this will often be derived from the associated business process reengineering notjust process improvement.

Executive coaching helps you assess the benefits of process change in your project see p 8

3rd Mistake: Buying a system from a vendor that ceases support for the productor ceases tradingJohn says Broadcast MAM is still a small, fast-evolving, and unstable market. Important questions toask are: Is MAM a key focus for this vendor or a sideline? Is the vendor winning projects and if so, howrecently? Is there a clear development roadmap and evidence of progress within it?

Finding a vendor that will stay the course and continue to support the product you choose as a centraltechnology in your business is no easy task. Over time, the system is very likely to require fixes,upgrades and additions which is a serious problem if its creator is no longer in business. As onebroadcaster put it Large companies can choose to abandon a product line, and small specialistcompanies can go bust, so it 's pot luck! Companies may also be bought and future roadmaps alteredor discarded.

Keith Cass of ITN saw this as One reason for taking more in house . However this is not so differentan issue as for any software and by paying attention to the kind of questions suggested above, the riskcan be reduced even if it cannot be eliminated.

Develop a strategy to minimise the risk in your vendor choice with executive coaching see p 8

From our analysis,the process is everything

A European Broadcaster


5/8


4th Mistake: I mplementing a MAM solut ion that ignores the physical broadcastenvironmentJohn says The broadcast environment will still include hardware systems and physical media for sometime to come yet many MAM systems pay little attention to this. Some MAM systems however cantrack tapes with placeholder assets which can later be populated with media when the tape is finally

digitised. I n addition some solutions can communicate with ingest, automation and playout systems tomove content around and reflect the status of media right through the broadcast chain.

Although the majority considered this a mistake, opinions varied on its severity. One consultantdescribed it is as completely pointless to install a system that cannot tightly integrate with theexisting Broadcast Technology environment . Steve France of AscentMedia Consulting Services said there is never an overnight switchover from tapes to digits and that legacy integration is key tobuilding acceptance of the new system.

It wasnt just the consultants however; a broadcast archivist said This is an area of particular concernto archives as it may result in parallel library systems for physical storage and tapeless if not addressed.

The other side of the debate was represented by Peter Thomas of T.BITE Consult ing; Consideringthe decreasing importance of physical media and the benefits to be derived from full file-basedoperation, it can be a good strategy to select a solution that does not support physical media, thusforcing users towards file-based operations . Physical media may be supported via existing solutionsas long as absolutely required.

Glenn Hall of HP estimated the journey is for most another 8/ 10years but that failing to build deeprecognition of the task of process transfer, including a data migration strategy is critical.

Executive coaching helps you capture all your projects success factors see page 8

5th Mistake: Developing your own MAM systemJohn says Developing your own MAM system is unlikely to create a system as comprehensive,sophisticated, and reliable as a commercial product. Not only is it costly to match the many man-yearsthat have gone into available products but once your system is complete, you are then committed todeveloping the product long-term as requirements evolve. A broadcaster also has a very differentbusiness model, structure and skill-set from that of a product vendor.

This was the most hotly debated mistake. Obviously vendors showed their bias here (with onequipping Big mistake you should be buying our product! ) but aside from that, broadcasters were

more pro-build and consultants were more pro-product.

Tom Wragg of Media Asset Capital underlined this divide,saying Broadcasters always have the view that they areunique and can do it better than anyone else. Bothpoints are WRONG.

Max Griffiths of Accenture pointed out that Very fewbroadcasters are able to achieve this effectively, surprising considering the number that attempt to doso . My own experience as an independent consultant certainly echoes this.

Another broadcast expert from a large consultancy said broadcasters should buy MAM systemsfrom proper software development companies with proper product management/ developmentprocesses. Peter Thomas elaborated on this, saying Most industries outside broadcast have proven

that focusing on your core competencies while leveraging those of other companies in partnershipsallows you to create a business with the best possible ROI. The trend in fact is more and more

Broadcasters think they cando it better than anyone else

Tom Wragg, MAC


6/8


towards being a 'virtual broadcaster' as Glenn Hall of HP puts it, making or delivering content andoutsourcing all non-core services.

Some contributors didnt see this issue as black & white: Keith Cass of I TN reminds us that projectscontinue to evolve and change and therefore attract a high dependency on in house or supplier todeliver change management. A well defined project will look at all options including using in houseresource where appropriate.

Another broadcaster agreed Our own Media Management systemis fully integrated into content commissioning, purchasing, andscheduling. We've gone for a commercial workflow product - so it'sa joint in-house and outsource project.

Even when self-build has its pitfalls, many expressed their dissatisfaction with the available products.One consultant said there is nothing really out there that does everything that you want. Someare getting close (e.g. Ardendo) but even then require signif icant customisation . Niklas Krantz, aProject Manager at Swedish TV simply said that If there are no useful products currently available,then you have to do it yourself.

The problem, according to Adrian Scott of Bakewell House Consultancy, is that a commercial vendoris unlikely to understand your business anything like as well as you are. Stuart Murray of CandelaMediaConsulting (and former Head of Product Development for Colledia at Siemens) said The adoption ofa toolkit approach should enable Rapid Application Development of niche MAM applications. Wehave still to see a solid toolkit emerge. Colledia tried but wasn't supported. Konan look promising.

Richard Eberhart of GSAM agreed with the points made but maintains that some of the mostsuccessful projects are home-grown . I f a broadcaster has the IT resources to support themaintenance and continual development then it may be a strategic control decision.

One thing is clear; self -build is not a decision to take lightly based on the eagerness of your IT staff todo it or a misguided belief about the amount of work required to create it, extend it and support it.

Make a level decision on product vs self-bui ld with executi ve coaching see page 8

Theres More!The full report contains discussion of 5 more mistakes that MAM projects make plus someadditional mistakes suggested by contributors. And its free. Get it now at www.theNewBroadcast.com .

It includes the thorny topic of integrating production tools with a MAM and some strong opinions onwhether MAM is actually all about moving to commodity IT or as one broadcaster put it We shouldall go to PC World in future .

And FinallyOne broadcaster signed off their input to the research by saying, We're currently mid-project. Nodoubt mistakes will occur. This brings to mind a comforting quote for those about to embark on aMAM (or any other leading-edge technology) project

Problems and setbacks will of course always be a feature of new technology projects but its interestingto note from contributors that the people issues in technology projects often outweigh the technologyissues. Read about how I help minimise the typical challenges of broadcast projects on page 8.

Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new A lbert Einstein

There is nothing really outthere that does everything

that you want
http://www.thenewbroadcast.com/http://www.thenewbroadcast.com/


7/8


Contributors

Thank you to the broadcasters, consultants and vendors who contributed to the researchcontained in this report. In particular, the following participants gave permission to be identified withtheir comments.

Keith Cass, Director of Technology, ITNSarah Hayes, Head of Media Asset Management, BBCNiklas Krantz, Project Manager, Swedish TelevisionAttie van Wyk, Project Manager, M-Net Television

Max Griffiths, ECS manager, AccentureNiall Duffy, Digital Media, IBM Global Services (now Director of Me-Experior Solutions)Steve France, VP/ GM Consulting Services EMEA, Ascent MediaGlenn Hall, Principal Architect, Broadcast, HPRussell Grute, Head of Sales, TSL and Broadcast InnovationStuart Murray, MD, Candela MediaAdrian Scott, Principal, Bakewell House ConsultancyTom Wragg, CEO, Media Asset CapitalJeremy Bancroft, Managing Director, MSCLPeter Thomas, Owner, T.BITE ConsultingRichard Eberhart, Executive Director, Global Society for Asset Management

Mikael Jakobsson, EVP, ArdendoMark Finch, Head of Europe, Artesia

(The contributors organisation shown here was that provided by the contributor at the time ofparticipating in the research in Q4 2006.)

Thanks also to the other broadcasters, consultants, vendors and members of the trade press who chose

to have their input remain anonymous.Please note that the quoted comments of contributors do not necessarily represent my own opinions orthose of any organisation the contributor is associated with.

Contacting the Author

Do you have feedback for me about this report?Do you agree or disagree with the opinions of myself or

other contributors?Would you like to publish this report in print/ online?Want to ask anything about how executive coaching worksand how it could help you?

Then please do drop me a line.

Know anyone else involved with MAM Projects

Please forward this report to them

John [email protected]

Tel. 020 8444 2180www.theNewBroadcast.com

EG Consultancy LtdMaitland Villa, 30A Church Lane

London, N2 8DT, UK


8/8

mam mistakes short report

Documents