Feed the virtuous distribution cycle
If you know your DAM’s “why,” and are using data, pushing adoption, and distributing creative, you have a production cycle. What you do next determines whether that cycle is virtuous or villainous.
This is where we draw the guide back to where we started: with a conversation about how not everything is within your control, and most DAMs tend to devolve into unmaintained archives. What’ll decide whether yours improves with time or degrades is how cleverly you’re able to turn your DAM’s outputs into useful inputs, to make things better and better.
Take your DAM’s purpose, or “why,” for example. If you revisit that document and revise it to be even truer based on what you’ve learned, and it becomes even more inclusive of what most people using it feel, your rubric gets better. You’re better able to use it to decide what features to adopt or not adopt. If someone comes to you wanting to incorporate video asset reviews, and you know that it conflicts with your DAM’s narrowly defined “why,” you can feel confident (and justified) in telling that person no, because it’s not more productive.
The DAM cannot be everything to everyone, and when it starts to be, that’s how systems develop ‘featuritis’ and become so complex, it’s difficult to onboard users or keep everyone using it correctly. A well-defended DAM is a long-lasting DAM.