Skip to main content

Who's Doing Your ECM QA? Your Users?

Dave Gibson

End users are increasingly demanding. Not many years ago, expectations for apps and performance were set by experience with in-house systems. Now, users’ expectations are set by social media interaction in terms of interfaces and performance. Everyone expects high-performance access – both in their personal lives and for their knowledge worker applications.

ECM (Enterprise Content Management) systems, and their supporting IT and application teams, know this all too well. How often have you heard, “It’s taking forever to download a document,” or “search is taking forever!”

Two big problems are revealed - what do these ambiguous performance comments mean in terms of measured ECM application service levels AND why are you hearing about this problem from your end user? These problems lead to more questions. How do you diagnose the issue? What does forever mean? Why does the user know about their performance problems before you do?

The recent survey, Managing and Monitoring Business-Critical Content and Capture Applications, executed by AIIM and Reveille revealed critical statistics about these concerns.

■ 72% of organizations said their current performance monitoring was “manual – triggered by incidents/support calls.”

■ Of the companies surveyed, only 20% had dedicated content monitoring products that helped them find ECM-specific problems before their end users are affected.

■ Systems with 1000+ users created 60-150 support tickets per month.

This might be one reason that adoption and expansion of ECM solutions is such a challenge for organizations. According to a Forrester Global Enterprise Content Management and Archiving Online survey, “48% find user adoption of existing ECM solutions to be a challenge facing their organization”. (Five Key Trends That Are Shaping How We Manage Enterprise Content, Forrester Research, Inc., September 19, 2014)

Rethinking QA – Ongoing, Not One-Time

To get ahead of these support calls and improve end-user satisfaction, ECM support teams need to proactively manage their ECM application performance. Say goodbye to the days of testing only prior to upgrades and migrations, with ideal use cases, and a limited set of users. Say good riddance to relying on synthetic logins and scripts to tell you (by simulation) what your end-users are experiencing after deployment. And yes, let’s drop ambiguous performance descriptions like slow and “forever.”

In today’s demanding environment, with new case management and workflow-based applications, ECM applications are becoming increasingly mission-critical. Here are the top four items you need to know about your ECM environment to support continuous improvement and ensure your end users aren’t the ones dong your QA:

■ Know actual, named end-user's experience by having insight into their real-time transactions and response times.

■ Know your systems actual usage – both volume and transactions for a normal operations and peak loading scenarios.

■ Know when a problem is about to strike by leveraging thresholds, so you can be alerted when performance is starting to falter, before end-users feel the impact.

■ Know how to correlate issues between ECM platform performance and your end-user experience to more quickly diagnose problems.

There are many other important aspects to managing your ECM – benchmarking, trending, automatic repairs and more – but by focusing on the actual end-user experience, you’ll be one step closer to ensuring peak ECM performance and widespread adoption.

Dave Gibson is COO of Reveille Software.

The Latest

Like most digital transformation shifts, organizations often prioritize productivity and leave security and observability to keep pace. This usually translates to both the mass implementation of new technology and fragmented monitoring and observability (M&O) tooling. In the era of AI and varied cloud architecture, a disparate observability function can be dangerous. IT teams will lack a complete picture of their IT environment, making it harder to diagnose issues while slowing down mean time to resolve (MTTR). In fact, according to recent data from the SolarWinds State of Monitoring & Observability Report, 77% of IT personnel said the lack of visibility across their on-prem and cloud architecture was an issue ...

In MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Episode 23, Shamus McGillicuddy, VP of Research, Network Infrastructure and Operations, at EMA discusses the NetOps labor shortage ... 

Technology management is evolving, and in turn, so is the scope of FinOps. The FinOps Foundation recently updated their mission statement from "advancing the people who manage the value of cloud" to "advancing the people who manage the value of technology." This seemingly small change solidifies a larger evolution: FinOps practitioners have organically expanded to be focused on more than just cloud cost optimization. Today, FinOps teams are largely — and quickly — expanding their job descriptions, evolving into a critical function for managing the full value of technology ...

Enterprises are under pressure to scale AI quickly. Yet despite considerable investment, adoption continues to stall. One of the most overlooked reasons is vendor sprawl ... In reality, no organization deliberately sets out to create sprawling vendor ecosystems. More often, complexity accumulates over time through well-intentioned initiatives, such as enterprise-wide digital transformation efforts, point solutions, or decentralized sourcing strategies ...

Nearly every conversation about AI eventually circles back to compute. GPUs dominate the headlines while cloud platforms compete for workloads and model benchmarks drive investment decisions. But underneath that noise, a quieter infrastructure challenge is taking shape. The real bottleneck in enterprise AI is not processing power, it is the ability to store, manage and retrieve the relentless volumes of data that AI systems generate, consume and multiply ...

The 2026 Observability Survey from Grafana Labs paints a vivid picture of an industry maturing fast, where AI is welcomed with careful conditions, SaaS economics are reshaping spending decisions, complexity remains a defining challenge, and open standards continue to underpin it all ...

The observability industry has an evolving relationship with AI. We're not skeptics, but it's clear that trust in AI must be earned ... In Grafana Labs' annual Observability Survey, 92% said they see real value in AI surfacing anomalies before they cause downtime. Another 91% endorsed AI for forecasting and root cause analysis. So while the demand is there, customers need it to be trustworthy, as the survey also found that the practitioners most enthusiastic about AI are also the most insistent on explainability ...

In the modern enterprise, the conversation around AI has moved past skepticism toward a stage of active adoption. According to our 2026 State of IT Trends Report: The Human Side of Autonomous AI, nearly 90% of IT professionals view AI as a net positive, and this optimism is well-founded. We are seeing agentic AI move beyond simple automation to actively streamlining complex data insights and eliminating the manual toil that has long hindered innovation. However, as we integrate these autonomous agents into our ecosystems, the fundamental DNA of the IT role is evolving ...

AI workloads require an enormous amount of computing power ... What's also becoming abundantly clear is just how quickly AI's computing needs are leading to enterprise systems failure. According to Cockroach Labs' State of AI Infrastructure 2026 report, enterprise systems are much closer to failure than their organizations realize. The report ... suggests AI scale could cause widespread failures in as little as one year — making it a clear risk for business performance and reliability.

The quietest week your engineering team has ever had might also be its best. No alarms going off. No escalations. No frantic Teams or Slack threads at 2 a.m. Everything humming along exactly as it should. And somewhere in a leadership meeting, someone looks at the metrics dashboard, sees a flat line of incidents and says: "Seems like things are pretty calm over there. Do we really need all those people?" ... I've spent many years in engineering, and this pattern keeps repeating ...

Who's Doing Your ECM QA? Your Users?

Dave Gibson

End users are increasingly demanding. Not many years ago, expectations for apps and performance were set by experience with in-house systems. Now, users’ expectations are set by social media interaction in terms of interfaces and performance. Everyone expects high-performance access – both in their personal lives and for their knowledge worker applications.

ECM (Enterprise Content Management) systems, and their supporting IT and application teams, know this all too well. How often have you heard, “It’s taking forever to download a document,” or “search is taking forever!”

Two big problems are revealed - what do these ambiguous performance comments mean in terms of measured ECM application service levels AND why are you hearing about this problem from your end user? These problems lead to more questions. How do you diagnose the issue? What does forever mean? Why does the user know about their performance problems before you do?

The recent survey, Managing and Monitoring Business-Critical Content and Capture Applications, executed by AIIM and Reveille revealed critical statistics about these concerns.

■ 72% of organizations said their current performance monitoring was “manual – triggered by incidents/support calls.”

■ Of the companies surveyed, only 20% had dedicated content monitoring products that helped them find ECM-specific problems before their end users are affected.

■ Systems with 1000+ users created 60-150 support tickets per month.

This might be one reason that adoption and expansion of ECM solutions is such a challenge for organizations. According to a Forrester Global Enterprise Content Management and Archiving Online survey, “48% find user adoption of existing ECM solutions to be a challenge facing their organization”. (Five Key Trends That Are Shaping How We Manage Enterprise Content, Forrester Research, Inc., September 19, 2014)

Rethinking QA – Ongoing, Not One-Time

To get ahead of these support calls and improve end-user satisfaction, ECM support teams need to proactively manage their ECM application performance. Say goodbye to the days of testing only prior to upgrades and migrations, with ideal use cases, and a limited set of users. Say good riddance to relying on synthetic logins and scripts to tell you (by simulation) what your end-users are experiencing after deployment. And yes, let’s drop ambiguous performance descriptions like slow and “forever.”

In today’s demanding environment, with new case management and workflow-based applications, ECM applications are becoming increasingly mission-critical. Here are the top four items you need to know about your ECM environment to support continuous improvement and ensure your end users aren’t the ones dong your QA:

■ Know actual, named end-user's experience by having insight into their real-time transactions and response times.

■ Know your systems actual usage – both volume and transactions for a normal operations and peak loading scenarios.

■ Know when a problem is about to strike by leveraging thresholds, so you can be alerted when performance is starting to falter, before end-users feel the impact.

■ Know how to correlate issues between ECM platform performance and your end-user experience to more quickly diagnose problems.

There are many other important aspects to managing your ECM – benchmarking, trending, automatic repairs and more – but by focusing on the actual end-user experience, you’ll be one step closer to ensuring peak ECM performance and widespread adoption.

Dave Gibson is COO of Reveille Software.

The Latest

Like most digital transformation shifts, organizations often prioritize productivity and leave security and observability to keep pace. This usually translates to both the mass implementation of new technology and fragmented monitoring and observability (M&O) tooling. In the era of AI and varied cloud architecture, a disparate observability function can be dangerous. IT teams will lack a complete picture of their IT environment, making it harder to diagnose issues while slowing down mean time to resolve (MTTR). In fact, according to recent data from the SolarWinds State of Monitoring & Observability Report, 77% of IT personnel said the lack of visibility across their on-prem and cloud architecture was an issue ...

In MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Episode 23, Shamus McGillicuddy, VP of Research, Network Infrastructure and Operations, at EMA discusses the NetOps labor shortage ... 

Technology management is evolving, and in turn, so is the scope of FinOps. The FinOps Foundation recently updated their mission statement from "advancing the people who manage the value of cloud" to "advancing the people who manage the value of technology." This seemingly small change solidifies a larger evolution: FinOps practitioners have organically expanded to be focused on more than just cloud cost optimization. Today, FinOps teams are largely — and quickly — expanding their job descriptions, evolving into a critical function for managing the full value of technology ...

Enterprises are under pressure to scale AI quickly. Yet despite considerable investment, adoption continues to stall. One of the most overlooked reasons is vendor sprawl ... In reality, no organization deliberately sets out to create sprawling vendor ecosystems. More often, complexity accumulates over time through well-intentioned initiatives, such as enterprise-wide digital transformation efforts, point solutions, or decentralized sourcing strategies ...

Nearly every conversation about AI eventually circles back to compute. GPUs dominate the headlines while cloud platforms compete for workloads and model benchmarks drive investment decisions. But underneath that noise, a quieter infrastructure challenge is taking shape. The real bottleneck in enterprise AI is not processing power, it is the ability to store, manage and retrieve the relentless volumes of data that AI systems generate, consume and multiply ...

The 2026 Observability Survey from Grafana Labs paints a vivid picture of an industry maturing fast, where AI is welcomed with careful conditions, SaaS economics are reshaping spending decisions, complexity remains a defining challenge, and open standards continue to underpin it all ...

The observability industry has an evolving relationship with AI. We're not skeptics, but it's clear that trust in AI must be earned ... In Grafana Labs' annual Observability Survey, 92% said they see real value in AI surfacing anomalies before they cause downtime. Another 91% endorsed AI for forecasting and root cause analysis. So while the demand is there, customers need it to be trustworthy, as the survey also found that the practitioners most enthusiastic about AI are also the most insistent on explainability ...

In the modern enterprise, the conversation around AI has moved past skepticism toward a stage of active adoption. According to our 2026 State of IT Trends Report: The Human Side of Autonomous AI, nearly 90% of IT professionals view AI as a net positive, and this optimism is well-founded. We are seeing agentic AI move beyond simple automation to actively streamlining complex data insights and eliminating the manual toil that has long hindered innovation. However, as we integrate these autonomous agents into our ecosystems, the fundamental DNA of the IT role is evolving ...

AI workloads require an enormous amount of computing power ... What's also becoming abundantly clear is just how quickly AI's computing needs are leading to enterprise systems failure. According to Cockroach Labs' State of AI Infrastructure 2026 report, enterprise systems are much closer to failure than their organizations realize. The report ... suggests AI scale could cause widespread failures in as little as one year — making it a clear risk for business performance and reliability.

The quietest week your engineering team has ever had might also be its best. No alarms going off. No escalations. No frantic Teams or Slack threads at 2 a.m. Everything humming along exactly as it should. And somewhere in a leadership meeting, someone looks at the metrics dashboard, sees a flat line of incidents and says: "Seems like things are pretty calm over there. Do we really need all those people?" ... I've spent many years in engineering, and this pattern keeps repeating ...