-Pie

I have a hard time imagining any organization that doesn’t have some form of intellectual property. These orgs need to start treating information as a strategic asset.

For this, its important that we have marketing (or education or even storytelling) skills.

It’s all so new that a lot of organizations don’t yet associate IM tasks with a specific job role, so #1 priority for us is identifying and marketing our value to the organization.

As you point out, it’s intellectual property management that currently resonates with business, so let’s claim that space.

(“hide the hat” consulting expense story described at: http://books.google.com/books?id=RtBmL5gHhUUC&lpg=PA31&ots=J7ASPAZXEm&dq=hide%20the%20hat%20expense%20consulting&pg=PA30#v=onepage&q&f=false)

Kidding aside, I suspect these “tips of the iceberg” type cheating occurs most when it’s convenient or easy to justify or rationalize. In terms of reimbursement, it may be “easy” because the bartender/manager/company culture allows it. But part of this type of fraud may come from a sense of fairness or feeling there’s no harm done.

Referencing the author’s point on the “Web’s 3 O’s” (open standards/source/data on her About Us page) I suspect many of us in, or related to, software, IT, or just the Web in general are guilty of pushing the boundaries. In terms of end-user agreements and copyright do we always use royalty free images and music, never borrowing copyrighted materials? Have we ever downloaded/shared a song we weren’t supposed to, used a software license inappropriately, or created an account with the competition’s site just to “compare” features? I’m not condoning illegal/amoral/EULA-breaking activities, but I do understand some of the reasons behind them which includes how easy it is to copy & paste, a possible lack of repercussions, and a sense of fairness in some cases (which may be justified in certain cases).

1. Lie to my colleagues
2. Lie to my partners / clients

No short-term gain is worth the corrosion to oneself and to the fragile bonds of trust which comes with living dishonestly.

There’s some of the stuff I don’t agree with, but I’m totally biased (being an Umbraco fan boy and everything)
I’ll comment on this once all the parts are posted.

One thing though: It seems like Sitecore is trying hard to be/include more that one thing: Being a CMS, Marketing Platform and Analytics package. Umbraco will never do this (according to the founder), but only do one thing (good): Being a CMS and a content framework.

So with these two totally different approaches, one will always have more stuff/features than the other. And in my experience, that’s not necessarily a good thing.

But keep up the good work! Looking very much forward to the next parts, hoping they are equally well written

I experienced this debate for years – dating back to my work at a ‘vendor neutral’ technology agency, and enjoy and value many conversations regarding all WCM and customer engagement implementations.

I moved from a ‘vendor neutral’ agency to work for a commercial vendor. You moved from a commercial CMS software vendor to Open Source You moved from a commercial CMS software vendor to Open Source. We surely have differing opinions based on what we have chosen to support. Open Source and commercial software compete head-to-head in many technology sectors – and the buyers decide which is right for them. By sharing the experiences of our partners we’re sharing opinions. Do opinions equal FUD? Maybe the title of the white paper is provocative but we welcome the community debate.