I my experience this is something that most edrms projects only really pay lip service to. Change management usually amounts to some librarian type turned manager spouting a few platitudes about the benefits of "information sharing" and making a couple of limp threats re the State Records Act.

Nearly all of the implemenations I have worked on have been failures. Either the take up poor or there is massive non-compliance by the users.

I've found that those organisations who decide to implement any new system (not only an EDRMS) court failure of the project at the budget stage.

When evaluating the available budget and deciding on which sections of the implementation proposal to drop in order to save money, it usually is Change Management, Project Management, Documentation, and Training (probably in that order as well that is dropped or reduced. In many cases, these items are given to someone in-house to deliver as a replacement for professional services by the implementer.

You can almost determine the success or failure of the project by how these important parts of the implementation/upgrade is handled. The old adage is true - you truely get what you pay for!

Yes, the magic wand syndrome I call it. Someone is given the title project manager, change manager etc without having any of the necessry skills. There tapped on the head and hey presto they're it.

The other thing is you often get the branded mouse pads etc as though that's going to get people to learn a whole new application.

According to microsoft
Change Management is the practice of administering changes with the help of tested methods and techniques in order to avoid new errors and minimize the impact of changes.