Is it really a Showstopper?
Tags: 
****This is the archive of my old blog, feel free to find this post on the new blog, please update your bookmarks****
There is quite a bit of focus this morning on Technote 1316457 Removing users from Lotus Connections, according to the Technote:
Once a person is entered into the Connections system they should never be removed.
Now lets look at this a little deeper, except for in certain exceptional cases do you really want to delete users from Connections? I don't think so, part of the value of Lotus Connections is to be able to preserve the tacit knowledge of employees who retire or otherwise leave the company, imagine you take on a new role in an organization and have access to your predecessors Communities, Activities, Blogs, Dogears, and yes even their profile to see who their colleagues were (which will probably differ from the formal org chart).
The Technote goes on to reference SPR JHUG7DKS73 open to investigate this issue, and while I believe that there should be a way to remove a user if needed, it is not a showstopper to implementing Lotus Connections, user deletions should be the exception not the rule. In the case above where a division is splitting off, I am sure there are more challenges in splitting off a division then simply removing the employees from Lotus Connections, I am sure that it is just one more item on a list of things to figure out.
Now when keeping employees who left the organization one thing that is apparent is that you might need to display a different subset of data for an active employee compared to a non-active employee who might no longer have such information as a Phone Number, e-mail address, reporting structure. This is supported in Lotus Connections you can add different profile types and customize them to display different data for different people, this is fairly easy to do.
So yes, there should be a way to remove an employee, but I don't think it is a showstopper.
****Comments are closed here, got something to say? find this post on the new blog, where your comment is welcome****




-

Comments
Posted by Chris Whisonant @ 12:01:16 PM on 08/29/2008 | - Website - |
What about some inactive/active flag? Greyed text for the name?
Posted by Nelson Morris @ 01:10:54 PM on 08/29/2008 | - Website - |
Posted by luis benitez @ 05:30:49 PM on 08/29/2008 | - Website - |
I assure you that the same people that called it a "showstopper" would be shocked and appalled if someone's public facing social communications were deleted after their departure.
In fact, come to think of it, they were { Link }
Posted by Nathan T. Freeman @ 07:26:36 PM on 08/29/2008 | - Website - |
At a certain point, do you start running into storage & performance issues? If you're maintaining thousands of inactive records (assuming you haven't dumped it all into a segregated inactive area) doesn't that potentially get in the way of your active users and their experience? Having to bear the load of (to borrow a records management concept) thousands of non-current business records could at some point affect performance, couldn't it?
I'll hang up and listen to your answer.
Posted by Daniel @ 08:33:20 AM on 09/05/2008 | - Website - |