I’m wrapping up a database migration project with a client and the concept of ROI (return on investment) is on mind. I like to be realistic with clients and share what’s sustainable for data management/DAM based on their capacity. Traditional ROI structures aren’t a great fit for data migrations or DAM labor.
This isn’t a new conversation. Back in 2013 Ralph Windsor wrote an article in CMS Wire about how you conceptualize ROI when deciding to buy a digital asset management system. He talks about how the corporate idealization for wanting statistical values assigned to ROI isn’t compatible with DAM labor because metrics for length of time to find an asset, for example, can’t be generalized. It could take minutes to weeks to find something, especially if the file location is unknown or it’s in an obsolete format. Check out the article for yourself: https://www.cmswire.com/cms/digital-asset-management/real-world-digital-asset-management-roi-020415.php
In my project, my ROI focus is on what would help my client’s staff five years from now. Some of the biggest challenges I pinpointed were more about keeping systems updated and flexible to changing data needs. As an ROI strategy, one of the best investments organization’s can make is in documentation that explains decision making, tech choices, and known data management issues with operations, workflows, or exporting data.
What kind of ROI should we look for in DAM/data management? What do we do when we already have several systems used to manage assets? What value does tracking statistics or business intelligence data have for DAM?