Intranet in a box?

Curiously, intranets - after at least two or three years in the popular vocabulary - still constitute a grey area when it comes to grasping strategy, implementation and usage. Interpretations of the word "intranet" range from LAN (local network infrastructure and file servers), through services typically found on a LAN (internal e-mail, scheduling, accounting systems), via networked internal information applications (usually Windows-specific) right through to browser-based secure information environments. It seems that almost anything can be called an intranet, and consequently any organisation with a LAN "has one".

I believe the market will see many contenders for boxed intranets emerge in the marketplace during this year and the next.

As interpretations go, this is a little misleading. While I don`t profess to have the last word on the interpretation of the word intranet, my understanding is closest to the notion of a browser-based set of applications and information environments, aimed at accumulating information and making work processes easier and more accessible throughout the organisation.

A good intranet should be browser-based. The word originally started appearing together with "Internet", indicating that the World Wide Web technologies used to disseminate information (most often simple HTTP) could be put to good use inside companies as well as outside - bridging disparate operating systems or platform choices. There`s no doubt that the wave of groupware applications already contains most of the desired features of an intranet (at least potentially) but a browser-based intranet adds a significant and attractive additional component - it reduces the cost of ownership and development.

While some contend that browser-based internal applications are a step back towards the mainframe of yore (central control and dumb terminals), it seems to me that the promise contained in a true intranet puts cost of ownership concerns first. Upgrades, training and client installations are kept to a minimum, while the work that will make an intranet useful to an organisation can take precedence in terms of resources.

Typically, I believe that a good intranet will contain the following classes of components:

• Sales force automation, with contact management and escalation procedures.
• Group scheduling.
• Customer service information and knowledge base.
• Human resource information (leave forms, expense claims).
• Project management.
• Project accounting and time sheeting.
• Marketing information (press releases, product descriptions).
• Messaging.

Clearly, not every organisation will implement every aspect, and intranet applications can vary widely in terms of actual needs. One thing that is increasingly becoming clear, however, is that custom development is not necessarily called for in all instances. Organisations are realising that while their internal IS resources are usually amply trained in server administration, only the largest corporations can actually afford to have specially dedicated teams who develop and administer their internal applications. In short, intranets of the magnitude indicated above, more often than not don`t come to fruition because of the inherent interplay between limited roll-out resources and limited commitment on the part of department heads or "designated intranetters" to supplying information.

The result is often a good idea and practically non-existent implementation. Some software companies have realised this and are beginning to re-think the notion that every intranet needs customised strategy and development. After all, if one examines my list of typical resources it soon becomes apparent that a lot of those are generic and won`t change much from organisation to organisation.

Time to market is of the essence, and corporate buyers are realising that a bit of customisation can go a long way towards keeping the momentum, while ground-up development often kills an intranet effort before it is ever allowed to take off. Enter the "intranet in a box". Similar to the "Internet in a box" all-in-one starter kits of a couple of years ago, boxed intranets are beginning to mature as a technology.

Previously, attempts were made by software giants such as Netscape (in a Sun/Netscape server bundle) to take a plug-and-play intranet to market, but - truth be told - this required just as much development as any other intranet. The only good thing was that it presented a clear platform choice and came neatly wrapped in a few boxes. Rolling it out still meant that most things (anything database-related) still had to be strategised, scoped and coded up: an easy task for large organisations, an insurmountable obstacle for smaller ones.

I believe the market will see many contenders for boxed intranets emerge in the marketplace during this year and the next. A Dutch company, IntraSites (http://www.intrasites.com), appears to have a ready-to-roll solution for various platforms, including NT and MacOS. Its SiteSolution software promises easy-to-customise standard modules, with more specialised add-ons available.

The more I think about it, the clearer it seems to become - with proprietary systems either too obscure or too limited in scope, there is a huge market here. Setting up a company, while not exactly an easy task, is becoming a matter of paying a specialist to register a name, a VAT number and open a bank account. The real work begins almost immediately, but many small to medium businesses struggle for ever after with internal systems and procedures. Soon, you will be able to buy a hub, a server, an NT server pack with licenses and a boxed intranet and bingo! You have an instant company.

Well, perhaps it`s not quite that easy, but it should make things a lot easier for many organisations. The journalistic me is holding his breath waiting for lots of boxes with intranets from kind suppliers to arrive for testing. If I get anything, I`ll report back on it here.