Information Management Benchmark: 2009 State of the Function

Author: Karen Wilson, Director & Lead Analyst

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.

Open 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

Tables & Figures

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