Issue: SharePoint 2013 Configuration Wizard Failure

Description
SharePoint Products Configuration Wizard:  Configuration Failed
Error referencing Step 3:  "Failed to Create the Configuration Database"


Environment Observed
SharePoint 2013 Preview
Windows Server 2008 R2 SP1
SQL Server 2008 R2 SP1


Solution
I searched the Web for blog posts referencing this error, there were quite a few.  I verified the service accounts settings and the SQL Server configurations (Kalil, 2012).  I ran the psconfig command below from PowerShell, from the BIN directory.  After this cmdlet completed, I ran the Configuration Wizard again and the Wizard was successful.

psconfig.exe -cmd configdb create SkipRegisterAsDistributedCacheHost user %domain\service account% password %password% passphrase %password%

(Spiffy, 2012)
 


References

Khalil, G. (July, 2012).  Installing SharePoint 2013 Preview on Windows 2012 Server with SQL 2012-Part 2.  Retrieved September 30, 2012 from http://sharepointgeorge.com/2012/installing-sharepoint-2013-preview-windows-2012-server-sql-2012part-2.

MSDN (2012).  Max degree of parallelism Option.  Retrieved September 30, 2012 from http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms181007(v=sql.105).aspx.

Spiffy (August, 2012).  3 Steps to Setup your SharePoint 2013 Preview.  Retrieved September 30, 2012 from http://spiffy.sg/developers/3-steps-to-setup-your-sharepoint-2013-preview.

SharePoint 2010 UPA Idle

DESCRIPTION

I ran into an issue with the User Profile Application (UPA) recently.  I had recently added a custom user property to the UPA and needed to do a full synchronization to pull in the values from Active Directory.  I manually initiated a full sync, however, the Profile Synchronization Settings remained "Idle."

SOLUTION


First thing I did was RDP to the SharePoint application server and to figure out the LOGONSERVER.  From the command line I typed:

echo %logonserver%

Doing this revealed that that the LOGONSERVER was a domain controller DC01.  I investigated to find that this server was running Windows Server 2003.  I continued to research the domain and found that the entire domain was running at 2003 level and there were a mix of 2003 and 2008 domain controllers.  The domain level wasn't the issue, but the specific server might be the issue.

Next, I manually changed the LOGONSERVER of the SharePoint  application server to a Windows Server 2008 domain controller named, DC03.  I did this from the command line using the following command:

set logonserver=\\DC03

With the LOGONSERVER updated, I attempted to run another full UPA sync.  It was successful this time.

Finally, I wanted to hard code this LOGONSERVER setting to ensure that I didn't have to monitor this.  To do this, I made the following change on the SharePoint application server:  Start, Control Panel, System, System Properties. Advanced Tab, Environment Variables, System Variables.  I added a System Variable called "LOGONSERVER" and I set it to DC03.

Why Certain SharePoint Solutions Aren't The End Game

Generally speaking, as an organization matures, business processes often need to become more defined and standardized to facilitate repeatability and scalability.  Business processes may also  become more centralized out of necessity.  For example, if you have a lemonade stand on ten streets in town and each one is independently managed, the independent stands end up wasting a lot of time designing their own signs, figuring out how to process sales, and making trips to the grocery store.  If the lemonade stands centralize and standardize then perhaps there is only one group in charge of designing signs, and another group for stocking inventory, and another group for collecting the cash.  Each functional group can then serve the rest of the lemonade stands and the whole operation becomes much more efficient.

I believe that SharePoint has experienced a lot of success by helping companies get one step closer to the centralized and standardized model.  A sweet spot has been opportunities with ten independent lemonade stands.  I thing collaboration sites bridge a huge gap  at this stage when companies don't have mature processes in place, haven't figured out how to do things efficiently, and transactional systems are nowhere to be found.  Only after intentional progress and many waves of iteration will a company achieve great efficiency in such processes.  SharePoint helps in that progression...but I don't think that it is necessarily the end game in all cases.

One advantage to using SharePoint is it is quick and easy to get a solution up and running and the solution is probably a lot better than an email and document attachment process that was occurring before.  We can make successes in these situations and they are great steps forward.  If you read the Budgeting Portal Case Study you will see how SharePoint was used for Budgeting and Planning.  However, there comes a point where we need our process data to be completely integrated with other process data.  It needs to be relational.  It needs to be consistent.  And the ways we consume and produce the data electronically needs to be consistent and intuitive for us to achieve the level of efficiency that we are seeking.  Sometimes, our processes get to be too grown up for SharePoint, quite frankly.

The Budgeting Portal that I have been demonstrating at SharePoint Saturday events is only in SharePoint, temporarily.  Eventually, this is being moved to Hyperion Budgeting and Planning.  You see, a process that started off in email evolved to a document library in SharePoint.  Then it evolved again within SharePoint to include list data.  It continued to progress and get more sophisticated with custom databases, TSQL views and stored procedures, SSIS packages, SSRS reports, dashboards, and Data View Web Parts.  Then the practical limit within SharePoint was reached.  The data in the Budgeting Portal needed to be tied more closely to other financial data that could only be maintained in a financial system.  It became inevitable that this solution would need to become part of the overall financial system in order to facilitate the next wave of progression and efficiency.

Whether it is a lemonade stand or a budgeting and forecasting process, I believe that in many cases, we need to view SharePoint as a tool to help define a process, give it a place to become organized, mature it, and then transfer it to its permanent home.  I don't approach every project this way, but I am seeing this approach become more applicable and more common especially as transactional systems are becoming more flexible.  I believe that the core capabilities of ECM, collaboration, and social computing will eventually become very practical within CRM and ERP systems, which already provide business processes tuned for best practices and rigidity.  In the future, I believe that more and more SharePoint projects will be initiated, not with the purpose of being the end all, but rather with the purpose of promoting adoption of rigid processes in CRM and ERP.  SharePoint can help bridge the gap by being the interim solution where process discovery, definition, and initial improvements are made. 

SPS NYC: Case Study of a SharePoint 2010 Budgeting/Forecasting Portal

Event:
SharePoint Saturday New York City
Saturday, July 28, 2012

Session Title:
Case Study of a SharePoint 2010 Budgeting/Forecasting Portal

Abstract:
A professional services company required a company-wide budgeting solution in time to do year end budgeting, forecasting, and strategic planning.  The organization’s commercial off the shelf (COTS) finance system couldn’t fulfill the requirements.  Despite many resource and time constraints, a solution was developed and rolled out within 6 weeks using SharePoint Server 2010, a custom SQL Server database, SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS), SQL Server Reporting Services (SSRS), SharePoint Designer, and Data View Web Parts.  This session includes a demonstration of the solution as well as a walkthrough of the project approach and lessons learned.

Slides:

Case Study of a SharePoint 2010 Budgeting/Forecasting Portal.pdf

SPS Baltimore: Case Study of a SharePoint 2010 Budgeting/Forecasting Portal

Event:
SharePoint Saturday Baltimore
Saturday, May 12, 2012

Session Title:
Case Study of a SharePoint 2010 Budgeting/Forecasting Portal

Abstract:
A professional services company required a company-wide budgeting solution in time to do year end budgeting, forecasting, and strategic planning.  The organization’s commercial off the shelf (COTS) finance system couldn’t fulfill the requirements.  Despite many resource and time constraints, a solution was developed and rolled out within 6 weeks using SharePoint Server 2010, a custom SQL Server database, SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS), SQL Server Reporting Services (SSRS), SharePoint Designer, and Data View Web Parts.  This session includes a demonstration of the solution as well as a walkthrough of the project approach and lessons learned.

Slides:

Case Study of a SharePoint 2010 Budgeting/Forecasting Portal.pdf

SPS Boston: Case Study of a SharePoint 2010 Budgeting/Forecasting Portal

Event:
SharePoint Saturday Boston
Saturday, April 28th, 2012

Session Title:
Case Study of a SharePoint 2010 Budgeting/Forecasting Portal

Abstract:
A professional services company required a company-wide budgeting solution in time to do year end budgeting, forecasting, and strategic planning.  The organization’s commercial off the shelf (COTS) finance system couldn’t fulfill the requirements.  Despite many resource and time constraints, a solution was developed and rolled out within 6 weeks using SharePoint Server 2010, a custom SQL Server database, SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS), SQL Server Reporting Services (SSRS), SharePoint Designer, and Data View Web Parts.  This session includes a demonstration of the solution as well as a walkthrough of the project approach and lessons learned.

Slides:

Case Study of a SharePoint 2010 Budgeting/Forecasting Portal.pdf

SAAS Vendors Capitalizing on an Accessible from Anywhere Misconception

I think that there is a misunderstanding in the marketplace, a perception by Software as a Service (SAAS) prospects and customers, that the only way they can have a solution that is available from "anywhere" is if they choose a cloud solution. This is a ridiculous assumption and one that cloud vendors seem to be capitalizing on. World Wide Web accessibility should not be considered a discriminator for on-premises versus cloud debate, and it certainly shouldn't be considered an advantage for an SAAS solution option. If anything, level of flexibility in accessibility should be considered a disadvantage to SAAS offerings, since SAAS offerings by definition, require some form of WAN or Internet connection.

For on-premises deployments of Web-based software products, accessibility from the World Wide Web is a matter of corporate policy and network configuration. In many highly secure environments governed by extensive policies, procedures, and directives; it may seem "impossible" for a business group to receive permission to have their Web portal published externally, to the World Wide Web. This is not a technical matter. This is a policy matter. In that regard, SAAS does make the "impossible" possible, by allowing business groups to bypass rules that they would otherwise need to follow if they went the on-premises route. So, is enabling a customer to circumvent a procedure truly a competive technical advantage to SAAS? I don't think so, and I don't think marketing should communicate it as such.

I think an underlying problem that this situation highlights is that many businesses still lack the ability to effectively prioritize their Information Technology initiatives and align those initiatives with the demands of the business. It is easier and more beneficial/less costly for a business unit to go rogue with an SAAS solution than it is for them to work with IT. This situation also points to a flawed management practice of allowing business units to dictate their own technology solutions as opposed to following a single Enterprise Architecture strategy. Whatever the case, "accessible from the Web" isn't a technology discriminator for SAAS, and vendors shouldn't confuse people into believing that it is.

References

LeClaire, J. (March, 2012). Should CRM Apps Be in the Cloud? Retrieved March 12, 2012 from http://www.crm-daily.com/story.xhtml?story_id=030001S1KJNI&nl=1&full_skip=1.

Enterprise Search Summit Spring 2012

There will be an Enterprise Search Summit in New York, NY May 15-16, 2012. The event is taking place at the Hilton New York.

Paul Olenick and I will be presenting "Solving SharePoint Issues."

Click HERE for more information about the event.

Error: "Unable to display this Web Part"

Description

A Data View Web Part (DVWP) is configured to display data from a Microsoft SQL Server datasource.  However, instead of data from the datasource, the Data View Web Part displays the following error message:

"Unable to display this Web Part.  To troubleshoot the problem, open this Web page in a Micrsofot SharePoint Foundation-compatible HTML editor such as Microsoft SharePoint Designer.  If the problem persists, contact your Web server administrator."

Solution *

1.  Using SharePoint Designer, test the datasource for the DVWP.  One possible cause for this error is that the credentials for the datasource are expired, as indicated in the SharePoint Designer dialog box.

2.  Open SQL Server Management Studio, expand Security, expand Logins, right-click on the Login and click Properties.  Uncheck the "Enforce Password Expiration" checkbox and click OK.

3.  Test the Data View Web Part, datasource again in SharePoint Designer.  If the issue is resolved, test the DVWP also in the Web browser.

* Disclaimer:  This solution represents only one of many possible solutions and may or may not be applicable in your environment.

Lessons from an ERP Project Failure and Vendor Law Suit

A customer/vendor conflict: 

In a recent Computerworld article, Chris Kanaracus explains how Epicor Sued Over Alleged ERP Project Failure.  In the article, the customer attributes the project failure due to shortcomings in Epicor software.  Customer states, "The project did not go well due to a variety of shortcomings in Epicor's software."

Here is my analysis:

In my experience doing these sorts of procurements, when specific business requirements are defined well and included in the RFP, SOW, and contractual documents, then many project risks (both cost and schedule types) are shifted to the vendor. If the vendor agrees to meet a specific requirement and both customer and vendor sign the contract, then vendor is on the hook. However, if the requirement is not documented in the initial contract, then the vendor may later push back by describing the requirement as "out of scope" and will only do the work if they can bill the hours. Scope creep is not only common in ERP projects, it is actually a well-accepted fact.

As a casual reader of the article, I must state up front that I don't have all the facts in this story.  I only know what I read in the article.   So, based on the article and past experiences I can go out on a limb and suggest two things that might have happened:

1. The customer failed to specify the steps of a key process and include those details in their contract with Epicor.  Therefore, the process became ambigious and unclear.
2. Epicor team attempted to remedy a technical shortcoming through additional pro services (billable time), and they failed to reach customer satisfaction before the bill got to be a million bucks.

Lessons to be learned:

This article reminds us of some key lessons that we can use when working with vendors.

• Invest as much time as necessary into defining processes well.
• Identify specifics even if they are obvious or assumed.
• Include specific business requirements, solution requirements, use cases, story board, and other illustrations in the vendor contractual document.
• Group related requirements into "categories" and seek fixed pricing estimate for each category (this forces vendor to do more careful estimates and makes the project easier to manage).
• Create a project completion checklist up front (should map closely to the categories) and include that the contracts.
• Realize even if you defined requirements really well, you still might miss important ones.  Therefore, remember to buffer the project budget to cover requirements that may have been missed.

A fixed bid estimate may cost up to 25%-40% more than a standard estimate, but that is a significant discount over the 500%-1000% overrun that is not only possible, but likely if the requirements are not clearly spelled out and the work begins.

References

Kanaracus, C. (August, 2011). Epicor sued over alleged ERP project failure. Retrieved October 20, 2011 from http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9219127/Epicor_sued_over_alleged_ERP_project_failure?taxonomyId=144&pageNumber=1.

SharePoint 4.0: How to Set the "Enable Client Integration" Setting on a Web Application

Description

How to set the "Enable Client Integration" setting for a Web Application in SharePoint Server 2010.


Solution

1.  Navigate to Central Administration, Application Management, Web Applications, Manage Web Applications.

2.  Click to highlight the Web application for which you would like to disable client integration.

3.  Click "Authentication Providers"

4.  Click on the Zone name.

5.  In the "Edit Authentication" dialog, "Client Integration" section, configure the "Enable Client Integration?" setting.  Click Save.

SharePoint 4.0: Content Type Column Does Not Display in Datasheet View

Thanks to Glyn Clough for suggesting the correct answer to this over Twitter!

Description

When creating a Datasheet View in SharePoint Server 2010 and choosing to display the Content Type column in the view, the Content Type does not appear in the view.

In this Datasheet View Definition, the Content Type column is in position #4.

The Content Type column does not display in the Datasheet View.

This is especially frustrating when working with documents in bulk because you would want the ability to modify the Content Type of multiple documents at one time.  When the Content Type column doesn't display in Datasheet View, it is not possible to modify the Content Type of multiple documents at once.

Solution

The solution is to modify the Datasheet View and set the Content Type column to position #1.

1.  Navigate to the SharePoint site where the Document Library is located.
2.  Site Actions > View All Site Content.
3.  Click on the Document Library to open the default view.
4.  On the Ribbon, click on the Library tab.
5.  On the Ribbon, click on Library Settings.
6.  Beneath the Views heading, click on the Datasheet View, or the Standard View you would like to open in Datasheet mode.
7.  Set the Content Type column to display in position #1.
8.  Click OK to save the changes.

In this Datasheet View definition, the Content Type column is in position #1.

The Content Type column does, indeed, display in the Datasheet View.

References

Clough (2011).  Glyn Clough's Blog - All About Microsoft SharePoint.  Retrieved August 29, 2011 from http://www.glynblogs.com.

SharePoint 4.0: Unable to Open PDF Files in Edit Mode from Document Library

Description

SharePoint users having Adobe Acrobat Professional expect to be able to open PDF files in Edit Mode, directly from a SharePoint document library.  These users are not able to open PDF files in Edit Mode.  When attempting to edit a PDF document directly from a SharePoint Document Library, they receive the error message, "The document could not be opened for editing."

Solution

The issue may be corrected by modifying the Require Check Out setting of the Document Library.

1.  Navigate to the SharePoint site where the Document Library is located.
2.  Site Actions > View All Site Content.
3.  Click on the Document Library to open the default view.
4.  On the Ribbon, click on the Library tab.
5.  On the Ribbon, click on Library Settings.
6.  Beneath the General Settings heading, click on Versioning Settings.
7.  Note the current setting for Require Check Out.  If Require documents to be checked out before they can be edited? is set to No, change this to Yes.
8.  Click OK to save the configuration change.
9.  From the Document Library, invoke the Document Context Menu by hovering the mouse over the title of the PDF document.  Check out a PDF document.
10.  Open the Document Context Menu again, and select to Edit Document (assumes that Adobe Acrobat Professional is installed on client computer).

Refer to Check out and edit a file for more information on the "Use my local drafts folder" prompt.


Reference

Adobe (2011).  Which Acrobat X Software is right for you?  Retrieved August 29, 2011 from http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat.html.

Microsoft Office (2011).  Check out and edit a file.  Retrieved August 29, 2011 from http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-sharepoint-services-help/check-out-and-edit-a-file-HA010153570.aspx

Error: Microsoft SQL Server: Cannot connect to (local)

Description

Error when attempting to log into SQL Server Management Studio:  "Cannot connect to (local)."

Solution

As the error message indicates, the SQL Server is not accessible.  The issue may be caused by one of the following:

1)  Issue with Server Connection Configuration

Start > All Programs > Microsoft SQL Server > Configuration Tools > SQL Server Configuration Manager

Verify the correct protocols are configured (this will vary based on type of environment).  Refer to Microsoft TechNet article, Choosing a Network Protocol, for further assistance with this topic.

2)  Issue with Service Account Authentication
Start > Administrative Tools > Services
Verify that the SQL Server (MSSQLServer) Service is running.  If it is not running, try to start it.  Make sure the Service Account credentials are properly configured and that the account is not locked out.

References

Microsoft TechNet (August, 2011).  Choosing a Network Protocol.  Retrieved August 29, 2011 from http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms187892.aspx.

Error: Content Type Still in Use

Description

When attempting to delete a content type from the site collection, Content Type Gallery, an error is returned:

Error
The content type is in use.
Troubleshoot with Microsoft SharePoint Foundation.
Correlation ID:  50b2222f-ee94-406eb7bb-d12a0be59dcd

Solution

There must be a document library, some place within the site collection using the Content Type that you are trying to delete.  For this reason it is not possible to delete the Content Type.  To fix this issue, identify the document library that is currently using the Content Type.  Change the Content Type of any documents in the library currently set to the Content Type.  Delete or remove the Content Type from the document library.

Once you've done this, it will be possible to delete the Content Type from the gallery.

Links: SharePoint 4.0 Service Pack 1

SharePoint Foundation 2010

KB 2460058: Description of SharePoint Foundation 2010 SP1
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2460058

White paper: Service Pack 1 for SharePoint Foundation 2010
http://technet.microsoft.com/library/hh301732(office.14).aspx

SharePoint Server 2010

KB 2460045: Description of SharePoint Server 2010 SP1
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2460045

White paper: Service Pack 1 for SharePoint Server 2010
http://technet.microsoft.com/library/hh285676(office.14).aspx


Related Links

Known issues when you install Office 2010 SP1 and SharePoint 2010 SP1
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2532126

List of all SharePoint 2010 and Office Server 2010 SP1 packages
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2510766

Microsoft SharePoint Server 2010 June 2011 Cumulative Update
http://support.microsoft.com/hotfix/KBHotfix.aspx?kbnum=2536599

Update Center for Microsoft Office, Office Servers, and Related Products
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/office/ee748587.aspx

Updates for SharePoint 2010 Products
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sharepoint/ff800847.aspx

Registration Open! SharePoint Saturday New York City 2011

Registration Open!

SharePoint Saturday New York City 2011

Saturday, July 30, 2011 from 7:30 AM - 6:00 PM (ET)

New York, NY

A CRM Vendor Pricing Whitepaper and Its Proper Place in the Overall CRM Procurement Process

SugarCRM recently published a whitepaper titled, "CRM Vendor Pricing: A Comparative Analysis."  The whitepaper explains pricing models for the CRM industry as a whole, and then provides detailed pricing information for a short list of CRM vendors.  The whitepaper also provides a Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) analysis of the vendors (SugarCRM, 2011). 

The reason I am posting is because this whitepaper reminded me of a common pitfull organizations fall into with CRM projects and I thought I would write about it.  The pitfall I am referring to is beginning or leading a CRM project discovery with vendors and products, instead of through a more analytical process focused around business requirements.  While the information in the whitepaper is certainly useful, I believe it is most relevant to project teams who have already gotten to the point where they are evaluating a short list of CRM vendors to compare capabilities, pricing, and other aspects of the overall investment and just need some help collecting and understanding pricing models and numbers. 

Based on my observations in the field, I believe that too many organizations initiate a CRM project based on superficial vendor or product information, such as advertisements or pricing.  I think this is a huge mistake and very common.  Instead of a reactive approach, I believe that the best possible CRM vendor/product selection decision is one that spawns from due process.  The project management processes that I've found to be very supportive, leading up to a CRM vendor/product selection, include the following:

1.  Project Charter - Purpose, business case, initial scope statement, team, affected organizations, order of magnitude
2.  Requirements Analysis - Surveys, interviews, general business requirements, technical requirements, solution requirements
3.  Scope Management Plan - Project scope baseline, requirements traceability matrix, boundaries, constraints, etc.
4.   Request for Proposal (RFP) - Template with detailed questions to be issued to vendors
5.  Vendor Evaluation Round 1 - Identify all possible candidates
6.  Vendor Evaluation Round 2 - Use requirements to eliminate and reduce list to a "short list", try to narrow down to less than 5
7.  Vendor Evaluation Round 3 - Issue RFP to short list, conduct demonstrations, narrow down to 3
8.  Final Comparison - Present full comparison of final 3 vendors with advantages/disadvantages, cost comparisons, etc.
9.  Vendor/Software selection

Based on the steps listed above, the whitepaper and the type of information it contains, really comes into play around step 6.


Reference

Blytheco (2011). Blytheco Sets its Own Competitive Prices for Sage CRM. Retrieved June 8, 2011 from http://www.blytheco.com/sagecrm/price.asp

Blytheco (2011). Sage SalesLogix Price List. Retrieved June 8, 2011 from http://www.blytheco.com/saleslogix/price.asp

Sage (2011). Sage ACT! Pro 2011. Retrieved June 8, 2011 from http://www.act.com/products/2010/act/

Salesforce.com (2011). Sales Cloud. Retrieved June 8, 2011 from http://www.salesforce.com/crm/editions-pricing.jsp

SugarCRM (2011). CRM Vendor Pricing: A Comparative Analysis. Retrieved June 8, 2011 from http://media.sugarcrm.com/white_papers/CRM_Total_Cost_of_Ownership_Analysis.pdf

Sonoma Partners (2011). Microsoft Dynamics CRM Online (SaaS / Hosted). Retrieved June 8, 2011 from http://www.sonomapartners.com/microsoft-crm-pricing.aspx

SugarCRM (2011). Sugar Subscriptions & Pricing. Retrieved June 8, 2011 from http://www.sugarcrm.com/crm/products/editions.html

SPS New York: SharePoint 2010 Search Driven Design Patterns: Better Portal Designs with Fewer Compromises

Event:
SharePoint Saturday New York
Saturday, July 30th, 2011

Session Title:
SharePoint 2010 Search Driven Design Patterns: Better Portal Designs with Fewer Compromises

Abstract:
When designing a SharePoint 2010 Intranet, collaboration portal, or business process solution we are faced with many decisions and challenges. While our objectives for user experience, information architecture, security model, and administrative model are driven primarily by business requirements, technology limitations tend to force certain decisions on us.  This session explores search driven portal design patterns and explains how we can leverage the SharePoint Server 2010 Search feature area in creative ways, leading to better portal designs with fewer compromises.

Slides:

20110730 0100PM SharePoint Saturday Search Driven Design Patterns - Bisciotti.pdf

SharePoint Designer 2010: How to Show Toolbox

Description

In SharePoint Designer 2010, the Toolbox provides a way to work with SharePoint Controls, Data View Controls, Server Controls, and Page Fields.  However, in order to use the Toolbox, you must first make it visible.

Solution

Follow these steps to make the SharePoint Designer 2010 toolbox visible:

1.  Click "Insert"
2.  Click "SharePoint  to expand the "Add SharePoint Controls" menu
3.  Click "Show Toolbox"