I do however have a remark about the post above. I can understand you need to find the balance between the right level of abstraction and practicality. WCM is more about publishing whereas DM and RM are more focussed on internal business processes.

Having said that, RM and DM can just as well be regarded as disciplines on their own. They have their own specific uses and techniques. And what about Knowledge Management, Collaboration, Search and Social Networks. They’re all related to unstructured information (content). I thinkit’s a slippery slope discussion to include or exclude any of these solutions in an generic ECM Model.

All these different disciplines share a number of techniques, processes and implementation guidelines (best practices), but they also have there own specific best practices. And to make matters even more interesting (or worse as you please), emerging ECM solutions tend to be a blend of different types of content management solutions. A DM platform can offer collaboration and BI functions, a KM solution can offer federated search and so on.

So, although I’m a big fan of the ECM maturity model, it seems a little bit arbitrary to me pick just DM and RM and put them on an ECM island. I do think that a few specific guidelines and remarks for specific ECM solutions would actually make the model more practical. This is the way I approach this issue right now while working on a new version of the Dutch Content Management Methodology called COMET.