On the market in ever-evolving incarnations for nearly twenty years, Microsoft SharePoint has become one of the world’s most popular intranet platforms. But even alongside a slew of Office 365 applications, is it the best option for today’s mobile-first, employee-centric digital workplace, where the importance of company-wide communication and culture-building has been on the rise?
We don’t think so.
Why not? Read on. . . .
Microsoft SharePoint boasts more than 190 million users across 200,000 customer organizations. In fact, half of the “10 Best Intranets of 2018” listed in the Intranet Design Annual were built on SharePoint.
But. . . .
Despite its evolution into a powerful web-based collaborative platform that’s now part of the Microsoft Office 365 suite, SharePoint isn’t without some serious limitations. Especially when it comes to its effectiveness as a communication tool.
In order to understand why SharePoint isn’t great for internal communication, it’s worth looking at its history and its DNA.
The story of SharePoint begins in 2001, when Microsoft released what was more or less a web-based way for employees of a company to share documents in a web browser, which in those days was a pretty big deal.
By 2003, SharePoint was quickly gaining in popularity, with the number of files that businesses were putting into SharePoint sites growing exponentially. As a result, businesses were requesting additional customization options in order to do more with their files.
But it wouldn’t be until the next SharePoint update in 2007 that Microsoft really began to change the game.
SharePoint Portal Server 2007
In 2007, Windows SharePoint Services 3.0 was released, and the SharePoint Portal Server was updated and renamed “Microsoft Office SharePoint Server 2007.” Users could now collaborate more with their teams, and do so on their own terms, meaning that they could create sites when and as needed, and allow these sites to be more intranet focused.
SharePoint in 2007
Yet for all its improvements, Microsoft Office SharePoint Server 2007 was still essentially a document management system. It wasn’t anything like what we’d today call an intranet or an employee communication platform.
SharePoint Intranets: A Bad Reputation
“In 2007, SharePoint looked and acted pretty much like a file sharing tool. It was clunky and not really something that people would want to use on a regular basis, especially when it came to employee communication. Nevertheless, it was around this time that companies started to use SharePoint as their intranet. After all, it was already there in many organizations, and IT generally loved it. That said, the transition to a SharePoint intranet usually took about two years, and it could cost anywhere from $500,000 to $1 million. The result was a SharePoint intranet built on top of a common SharePoint platform with a lot of custom development.
There were two huge drawbacks to this approach: 1) It was really expensive and 2) It created a dead end, meaning that once you’d done all of this customization, as soon as Microsoft brought out their next version of SharePoint, your intranet would be totally obsolete. To take advantage of any new developments, you pretty much had to throw the baby out with the bathwater. That’s why many IT departments and communication professionals today, when hearing the word “SharePoint,” immediately think of a massive project with a dead end—something that they never, ever want to go through again.”
—Frank Wolf, Co-Founder, Staffbase, and author of “The Social Intranet“
2010–2013: Enter the Cloud
Cloud computing changed everything. Until 2010, SharePoint would usually be installed on-premises on a customer’s data center, which would require about 20 servers. It took a massive effort. Suddenly, services like Salesforce and other cloud-based solutions were popping up. They brought a whole new delivery model for how to run enterprise applications.
This change meant that every on-premises, old-world software vendor needed to develop a dual strategy. They would still have their on-premises customers, but they would also serve customers who wanted to be in the Cloud.
For newer vendors, one big advantage was that they could pretty much ignore on-premises solutions entirely.
But that wasn’t the case for Microsoft, which had to serve both worlds. Especially for companies with serious security concerns, on-premises still appears to be the more common choice. But whether it’s a sensible choice is another question. Large enterprises invest a lot in security, but so do large Cloud providers. “Whether it’s more secure or less secure,” says John Treadway, senior vice president at Cloud Technology Partners, “the Cloud is at least as secure as most enterprise environments.”
The upshot of this debate has been that SharePoint has had to continue its line of development as an on-premises tool.
But for the Cloud version, Microsoft had a stroke of genius, deciding to update it continually. They called this version “SharePoint Online,” and the ongoing updates it received would be bundled and released periodically for their on-premises customers.
SharePoint Online Becomes Part of Office 365
Office 365 Subscription Packages
Today, Microsoft Office 365 is available in three subscription packages. The typical choice of larger organizations is called Enterprise E3. Every employee with a license receives access to the basic Microsoft applications that we’ve all come to know and love, like Outlook, Word, Excel, and PowerPoint.
Microsoft’s two enterprise options offer additional services, including SharePoint Online. These additional services are often pitched as being “free,” but as part of the Office 365 package, they’re really not. Moreover, building costs for SharePoint intranets remain high.
As for the included services. . . .
Microsoft Exchange software provides the backend to an integrated system for email, calendaring, messaging, and tasks via web browser. OneDrive is a file hosting and synchronization service that allows users to store, share, and sync files in the Cloud.
Stream is a corporate video-sharing service; Teams combines workplace chat, meetings, notes, and attachments (think of it as Microsoft’s version of Slack); and Yammer is a “microblogging” tool developed as a Twitter for the enterprise, to be used for private communication within organizations.
What you may have noticed is that while there’s no shortage of available tools, their sheer abundance and overlapping capabilities mean that organizations planning to roll them out in an organized, well-governed way find their employees are overwhelmed with how best to utilize them.
And a greater problem looms for many of these tools. . . .
O365 Is “Feature Rich, but Application Poor”
Microsoft positioned Office 365 as an integrated platform that could solve multiple employee workloads, with the added benefit of helping enterprises avoid a mix-and-match approach of tools from different vendors. Companies could theoretically streamline their digital workplace and save money while doing so.
But as has been pointed out by Tony Byrne of the Real Story Group, “It’s revealing that Microsoft almost always tries to pitch O365 to senior IT leadership and your CFO, rather than workplace business leaders [who] have rejected parts of Office 365 when given a chance to try it hands-on against reasonable alternatives. A key issue here is that customers must largely accept O365 services and user experiences ‘as-is,’ at a time when digital workplace leaders are trying to adopt employee-centric user journeys. It can be difficult to map employee journeys with O365 experiences, since the platform tends to be feature rich, but application poor.”
It’s also worth noting that Microsoft has introduced many Office 365 tools in response to market-share competition—not the needs of its users. This explains why many of its services are redundant when comparing their capabilities side by side.
These limitations have become increasingly problematic as newer workplace demands like the employee experience have put a premium on communication and culture-building across enterprises, i.e., the large groups of dispersed employees—including top-down groups, bottom-up communities, and individual teams—who can’t all be reached in the same “cookie-cutter” way.
What does Yammer do?
Asked about employee communication and how it relates to Office 365, IT leadership will typically say, “We have SharePoint, Yammer, and Teams, and these free tools will be ‘good enough.’” But they’re ignoring the serious issue of overlapping use cases and the confusion and poor adoption that stems from it.
Which tool do I use for which job?
“Which tool do I use for which job?” is an all-too-common question for Office 365 users. Confusion between Teams, SharePoint, and Yammer is rampant.
Yammer, for instance, was developed as a way to compete with the allure of Facebook and Twitter, and while it’s great for answering questions quickly, it lacks archivability, and is less helpful for finding older information. So perhaps Teams is the better option, although it was designed with collaboration among small audiences in mind.
Jacqui Olkin, a user experience consultant and information architect who has worked with SharePoint since its infancy, notes that “there’s a lot of confusion about how to use the products bundled in Office 365, and it requires a good deal of effort to develop a strategy, migrate existing assets, and train and compel people to use the tools consistently and properly. Many companies aren’t equipped to put in the effort needed to succeed. By contrast, practical, usable tools announce their value and are a natural fit with users’ other tools and habits.”
Such a confusing and fragmented user experience is a turn-off to employees. These less-than-intuitive tools aren’t designed to be mobile-first, they lack custom branding, they’re difficult to integrate, and they aren’t available in multiple languages. With so many shortcomings, the result is poor adoption and a serious lack of engagement.
And forget about saving money. According to Gartner, for every dollar spent on Office 365 licenses, organizations are spending between six and nine dollars on training and customizations.
Conclusion, or Why a SharePoint Intranet Isn’t Built to Communicate
SharePoint has been a huge success for Microsoft, and it’s now on the verge of completely conquering the intranet market. About 50% of organizations worldwide are already running or on their way to running SharePoint intranets, and it’s fairly certain that this trend will continue to build in the coming years.
That being said, a SharePoint intranet takes a great deal of time and effort to build and manage, and it doesn’t come cheap, particularly when compared to a growing number of out-of-the-box offerings.
As an IT-focused platform with a fundamental strength as a file storing system, SharePoint’s DNA isn’t suited for use by regular employees. Combine its many weaknesses with a need for constant IT assistance, and the result is an intranet that will fail to evolve and engage the changing requirements of the audience it’s meant to serve.
None of this is to say that SharePoint lacks workplace value. But getting its full worth means configuring it and other Office 365 applications alongside platforms and applications that are purpose-built for a mobile-first experience and focused on disseminating both company-wide and targeted, local communication in a way that is interactive, engaging, and consumer-grade.
Despite its popularity, a SharePoint intranet is certain to involve a great deal of time and resources. It is far from being the ideal solution for large organizations looking to create a digital workplace that fosters employee engagement and communicates in the culture-building ways now essential for modern enterprises with dispersed workforces.
A platform like Staffbase, built specifically for effective mobile-first employee communication and culture-building, and ideal for presenting your outward-facing enterprise information, provides a smarter and more cost-effective intranet, while still allowing you to benefit from SharePoint’s proven core strengths as a document management system. A demo can show you how.
For further information about mobile intranets, check out our blog or any of the following pieces: