Information Management Benchmark: 2009 State of the Function
This report is based on data from 591 corporate, government, education, and healthcare library/information center and vendor portfolio information managers who responded to Outsell’s 2009 Information Management Benchmark survey, and contains critical data for information managers. Since Outsell began reporting on the state of information management (IM) functions 10 years ago, the world has not experienced such economic uncertainty as it faces today. This sense of unease is reflected in the results of our 2009 study. Not only are IM budgets and staffing numbers dropping, but we also see some “deer in the headlights” mentality regarding staff deployment, service delivery, planning and performance methodologies, and challenges. The report contains:
- Data on IM budgets in 2009 and 2010 (forecast), including budget allocation and digital content spending;
- Data on IM staffing levels, services offered, and Web 2.0 service delivery;
- Analysis of the IM functions’ use of strategic planning and performance methodologies;
- Study respondents’ most effective metrics and marketing techniques, including a table listing the five most effective metrics broken out by corporate, government, and education sectors;
- Challenges facing information managers, and recommendations for addressing them;
- Implications for information managers facing reduced budgets.
Pub Date: October 7, 2009
Type: Briefing
Segments: IM
Keywords: Benchmarking, Best Practices, Vendor Portfolio Management
Pages: 41
Format: PDF 
We provide a link to download a PDF at the end of the purchase process.
Download PDF table of contents
Table of Contents
- Why This Topic?
- Methodology
- Budgets
- IM Budgets in 2009 and 2010
- Budget Allocation
- Digital Content Spending
- High Digital Functions Have Greater Market Penetration
- High Digital versus High Print IM Functions
- Staffing
- FTEs and Contractors
- Staff Deployment
- Ratios: Budget, Staffing, and User Metrics
- Services
- Services Offered
- Top Services
- Web 2.0 Service Delivery
- Strategic Planning and Performance Methodologies
- Strategic Planning
- Performance Assessment Methodologies
- Metrics and Marketing
- Effective Metrics
- Effective Marketing
- Challenges
- Implications for Information Managers
- Figure 1. Respondents by Market Sector, 2009
- Figure 2. Information Management Total Budget, 2009 and 2010 Projected
- Figure 3. Budget Breakout, Total Sectors, 2007 and 2009
- Table 1. Budget Breakout, Total Sectors, 2007 and 2009
- Table 2. Budget Breakout, High-Budget Sectors, 2007 and 2009
- Table 3. Percentage of Content Spending Devoted to Digital Sources, 2004, 2007, 2009, and 2010 Projected
- Table 4. High Print vs. High Digital IM Functions, 2009
- Figure 4. FTEs, 2009 and 2010 Projected
- Figure 5. Contractors, 2009 and 2010 Projected
- Table 5. IM Staff Deployment, 2009
- Table 6. IM Content Budgets, Users, and FTEs, 2009
- Table 7. IM Content Budget and FTEs per Potential and Actual User and Market Penetration, 2009
- Table 8. IM Services Provided, All Sectors, 2007 and 2008; Corporate, Government, and Education, Total and High-Budget, 2009
- Table 9. Top Services, 2009: Corporate, Government, and Education
- Table 10. Most Valuable Services: Users versus IM Managers
- Figure 6. Use of Web 2.0 Delivery Methods: Users versus IM Functions
- Table 11. Web 2.0 Delivery Methods, 2007 and 2009, High-Budget Sectors
- Figure 7. Strategic Planning, Total Sectors, 2004-2009
- Table 12. Strategic Planning, High-Budget Sectors, 2007 and 2009
- Figure 8. Performance Assessment Methodologies, Total Sectors, 2004 and 2009
- Table 13. Performance Assessment Methodologies, 2009
- Table 14. Top Five Most Effective Metrics, 2009
- Table 15. Top Five Most Effective Marketing Practices, 2009
- Table 16. Top Challenges by Sector, 2009
Tables & Figures