Unified messaging (UM) technologies integrate voice and fax services with email systems, including Exchange Server. UM products have been available since the mid-1990s but have so far failed to penetrate or captivate the messaging marketplace. However, recent developments in communications and networking, as well as changes in UM technologies, might finally give UM a shot at the big time. If you've been considering a UM solution and wonder whether the time is right, your best bet is to make sure you understand how the technology works and more important, how it works with Exchange.
What's UM All About?
UM generally refers to messaging functionality that provides access to (at the least) email, voicemail, and fax services via (at minimum) a telephone and a PC-style connection (i.e., a Web interface or an email client). UM vendors claim myriad benefits for the end user—principally, productivity gains through better access to messages and financial gains through management improvements. In most circumstances, these improvements are of greatest benefit to mobile users (e.g., salespeople who travel frequently and need access to email, voicemail, and fax services from any place at any time via any device). So why hasn't UM been a hit with consumers? Several reasons:
Substantial up-front costs. UM implementation often requires an initial upgrade of existing communications services, including any PBX telephone systems and Exchange systems that will be used for UM.
Lack of perceived ROI. The average cost for UM services ranges from $150 to $300 per user, excluding basic email and telephone service costs. But according to a 2003 Gartner report, determining a specific dollar value for UM-associated productivity improvements is difficult.
Lack of technological stability. Many businesses are reluctant to make an investment in technologies that are still evolving at such a rapid pace as UM. For example, in the past few years IP-based telephony systems have taken precedence over traditional PBX-based systems, and emerging Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)-based integration mechanisms have replaced traditional H.323-based mechanisms for IP-based telephony call signaling.
Difficulty determining ownership. Businesses can have a hard time deciding whether to hand over UM-management responsibilities to the telecom department or IT.
Capacity and storage concerns. Organizations that can't easily judge the impact of UM services on their network and server infrastructures are reluctant to implement such services.
Reliability concerns. Many organizations worry that consolidating voicemail and email services into one logical system will compromise accessibility, especially because data-messaging systems have historically achieved much lower levels of reliability and accessibility than their voice-messaging counterparts.
Compliance concerns. Businesses might worry about the applicability of compliance and discovery regulations to voicemail messages that end up being stored in Exchange messaging databases.
Security concerns. UM implementation means that more potentially sensitive data will be stored in fewer locations, with more forms of access to the data.
As you can see, these concerns boil down primarily to buying concerns (costs, ROI, and technological staying power) and implementation concerns (performance and management concerns). Knowledge is power, as the saying goes, so let's explore these two areas of concern so that you can better evaluate whether UM is right for you. . . .
