Making the Case for CMS!

Internet Librarian 2011October 19 2011

MAKING THE CASE FOR CMSNINA MCHALE & KEN VARNUM

@NINERMAC @VARNUM

What reasons have you been given that you

can't use a CMS for web

development in your library?

bitly.com/cmspoll

ONE-QUESTION SURVEY

1. Centralization of development2. Branding3. Democratization of content4. Control over your own destiny

MOVING TO CMS: THE ISSUES

Eliminate redundancy One system to rule them all Simplify everything through consolidation

Control Who had it? Who gets it?

Staffi ng levels Put right staff in right place Outsource hosting, worry about

customizing?

CENTRALIZATION OF DEVELOPMENT

Emphasize your brand Standardize site navigation Push core services & functionality Reduces cognitive overload for your patrons Galvanizes and promotes library identity

within your community (campus, city, etc. Doesn’t mean all departments/branches

need to look the same. If no brand exists, the scope of the problem

is well beyond the web folks.

BRANDING

CMS separates content creation from programming Lack of administrative oversight of content Focus on consistent message Perceived (or real) loss of control

Removes most skill barriers from authoring Someone’s expertise may become valueless Some HTML still may be helpful for

advanced users

DEMOCRATIZATION OF CONTENT

You’re not dependent on someone else to make things happen

When you want a new function, you can do it – often by mixing & matching existing tools

Ability to respond quickly to patron needsYou may inherit responsibility for

application (CMS) and web server security A security compromise could put your

parent institution at risk as well

CONTROL OVER YOUR OWN DESTINY

1. IT 2. Administration3. Staff

CMS CONCERNS FROM 3 DIRECTIONS

“CMSs are too limited. We’d have to mold the site to the CMS, rather than build exactly what we want.”

Most CMSs are very flexible and can be extended by contributed packages of code (i.e., Drupal modules)

Make a CMS choice carefully; research what strengths and weaknesses of each are and show how they are or aren’t a good fit.

IT CONCERNS: FUNCTIONALITY

“We don’t have a place to put it.” “Make one. Pretty please?” “We’re going rogue.”

Web hosting options are inexpensive Many hosting companies have “one

click” CMS install for popular CMS software

Support may be better than what you get in-house

IT CONCERNS: ENVIRONMENT

“No one will be able to maintain the system; it will become a security issue.”Adopting a CMS does require taking on

a maintenance regime.If the site’s functionality is not too

complicated, upgrades are not diffi cult.See if IT will agree to maintain server

environment; strike a balance.

IT CONCERNS: MAINTENANCE

“Open source software isn’t secure.” The nature of open source

development communities actually makes it more secure

The managers of these sites think open source CMSs are secure: whitehouse.gov (Drupal) wikipedia.org (MediaWiki) NYT blogs (WordPress)

IT CONCERNS: SECURITY, 1/2

“Too many people will have access to the web server.”

In most CMSs, only web admins require direct server access

Content creators add content via a browser

Existing accounts (i.e., LDAP/AD) can be used

Permissions of CMSs allow very granular, precisely controlled access

IT CONCERNS: SECURITY, 2/2

“We have to use our parent organization’s Content Management System.”

What are limitations of that CMS? Does that truly give your users the best

experience? Who “owns” web services within the library?

Admin? IT? Public Services?

ADMIN CONCERNS: TERRITORY

“Library staff will have free reign on the site.”

Develop a content strategy Who speaks on the site, and what should

they say? Set standards for content, branding, etc. Establish web publication workflows with

editorial review (CMSs support these!) Train library staff on all of the above

ADMIN CONCERNS: CONTENT/MESSAGE

“We don’t have anyone who can do this for you. No one has the time or the skills.”

“I can do it.” Install the CMS on your laptop and

develop a sample site. Time saving aspects of CMSs can free up

time doing tedious work (link checking, reports, stale content) on a static site to learn how to maintain a CMS-based site.

ADMIN CONCERNS: STAFFING

“A CMS will be too costly.” Learning the CMS will be an initial

investment, even if it’s free, in terms of employee time

Web authoring software (Dreamweaver, etc.) is no longer necessary for content creators to draft content and connect to the server Cost of licenses Cost of staff time learning specific software

versus web-based input of most CMSs

ADMIN CONCERNS: COST

“They’re too hard to use.” Web staff may have to learn the CMS

initially Most CMSs use browser-based editing

for content creation If staff can type in a web browser, they

can add content to a CMS

STAFF CONCERNS: TECH SKILLS

“This will be a big change; will we be able to manage it?”

“You won’t have to use Dreamweaver anymore.”

“You won’t have to use FrontPage anymore.”

“You don’t have to use HTML (if you don’t want to).”

Point out these and other benefits that will make life easier for content creators.

STAFF CONCERNS: CHANGE

“We won’t have control over our content.”

How much control do they have now? What are their specific concerns?

Organization must establish rules for content (workflow, procedures, etc.)

Most CMSs have very robust user/permissions systems that allow staff access to precisely what they need for their work, and no more

STAFF CONCERNS: AUTHORITY

What reasons have you been given that you can't use a

CMS for web development in your library?

THE ONE QUESTION SURVEY: YOUR RESPONSES

Nina McHale

nina@milehighbrarian.net

@ninermacmilehighbrarian.net

Ken Varnum

varnum@umich.edu@varnum

rss4lib.com

CONTACT INFORMATION