Looking to create intranet sites for your organization?
Microsoft SharePoint is your answer. SharePoint offers many resources and features for crafting intranet sites tailored to your company’s specific requirements. Intranet migration to SharePoint in Microsoft 365 is time-consuming, especially with a significant volume of existing content.
This article will explore two approaches for designing a new SharePoint intranet, focusing on quickly launching sites and optimizing your ROI. You can benefit by taking help from nearshore software development company.
Let’s get started:
Option 1: Minimum Viable Product (MVP)
The first strategy for establishing a SharePoint Intranet includes crafting a Minimum Viable Product (MVP) and swiftly initiating its launch. This strategy revolves around the concept of creating a relatively uncomplicated design and content initially, with subsequent incremental changes and enhancements, often driven by user feedback.
It’s important to note that, although this option doesn’t negate the collection of initial requirements and content from business users, the emphasis is on expediting this process.
The objective is to swiftly develop a functional and valuable resource, enabling an immediate return on investment and establishing a centralized platform for employees to access company-wide information.
To implement this option, you can either construct the intranet from the ground up or utilize one of the pre-existing templates available.
The primary rationale driving this approach stems from the nature of an Intranet project, characterized by its perpetual evolution.
The design and content continuously adapt over time, particularly considering the inherent flexibility in modern SharePoint, allowing dynamic adjustments to design and architecture.
For instance, altering the look and feel of an Intranet site can be effortlessly achieved through page editing and a diverse range of templates. Modifying navigation or reorganizing hub architecture and adjusting site names and URLs are also seamlessly executed.
The fundamental concept is to swiftly deploy an Intranet to employees, even if it initially contains minimal information. It is expected to evolve organically and mature progressively. As long as the site remains secure, it can be introduced to employees promptly, with subsequent enhancements and modifications occurring dynamically.
Pros:
- Rapid Implementation
- Minimal Cost (especially if outsourcing development)
- Ideal for organic growth and gathering employee feedback.
Cons:
- Initial content may be limited.
- May lack some Wishlist items or advanced capabilities.
Option 2: Customized Intranet
In contrast to Option 1, Option 2 involves a comprehensive approach where detailed business requirements are meticulously addressed with users and stakeholders upfront.
The intranet is then customized according to these specifications, with multiple iterations and design changes undertaken until most requirements are fulfilled.
This option often involves additional customizations and integrations beyond out-of-the-box functionality, utilizing automation tools like Power Automate and custom apps like Power Apps.
Pros:
- More comprehensive functionality compared to MVP.
Cons:
- Extended Timeline.
- Higher costs, especially when incorporating external resources and third-party themes.
Conclusion
Organizations must weigh their specific needs, budget constraints, and long-term objectives to select the most suitable approach for a successful SharePoint Intranet implementation. You can always consult nearshore software development company with expertise in SharePoint Integration Services.
The preferred choice, as indicated by the tone of this discussion, is Option 1 – constructing a Minimal Viable Product (MVP) promptly and allowing it to grow organically within the organization’s evolving technological and content landscape.
While both options are supported, the emphasis is on a swift turnaround and flexibility, particularly empowering Site Owners to adjust as needed.
Smaller organizations with budget constraints often find Option 1 appealing, whereas larger global organizations, with intricate communication and compliance requirements, may lean towards the thoroughness of Option 2.
Happy Reading!
