2005 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference Proceedings

0-7803-9028-8/05/$20.00 © 2005 IEEE.

A Case Study of a Content Management System: Choosing and Implementing a CMS

Nina JuncoA-dec, Inc. nina.junco@a-dec.com

Rahel Anne Bailie Intentional Design Inc.rabailie@intentionaldesign.ca

Denise Ledet A-dec, Inc.denise.ledet@a-dec.com

Abstract

This panel discussion follows up on “A Case Study of Content Management” from IPCC 2004, giving participants a view of the conclusion of this “whodunit,” discussing lessons learned and sharing the successes.

Keywords: content management, performance improvement, process re-engineering

Background

Once a company has committed to content management as a way of handling a raft of technical information, it begins a journey down a swift-current river. Even with a sound process as a map, the journey is not without its pitfalls. A-dec™, a leading dental equipment manufacturer, undertook such a journey in 2004.

The ambitious itinerary was tempered by the consultant brought on board, as the Marketing Communications department dealt with issues of changes to business processes, publication processes, corporate culture, competing corporate initiatives, and the inevitable scope creep as the content management system (CMS) pilot project threatened to balloon as other departments discovered the allure of the CMS “fix.”

The cautiousness has paid off, not only in better definition of requirements for handling both source and localized content, but in the final stages of the project: choosing and implementing The System. Keeping in mind the need to demonstrate return on investment, the project has already realized savings, even before the software has been implemented.

The content management project began as a departmental initiative in response to an increased need to develop user documentation for products in a regulated industry in expanding markets. Product development shifted from scheduled releases to a continuous development cycle—increasing the number of documentation sets required, and jurisdictional requirements increased the language variations required—the European Union (EU) requirement that medical devices carry language-specific documentation in every EU country where the product is sold, the demands on department resources increased exponentially.

Changes to Corporate Culture

The CMS project grew from a departmental initiative to an organization-wide project. Changes at the executive level brought new attention and, with it, new questions and concerns.

The questions were posed as part of the due diligence expected from new executives. What progress has been made? Who is involved? Given that the project was started with a specific need in mind, is the need still valid? The concerns mainly revolved around return on investment and were allayed by citing well-documented savings that had already been realized during the preparation for CMS.

To illustrate, realized savings on two document types were calculated at a minimum of 15% content that could be re-used in production of one document type, and a corollary reduction of turn cycle of 50% and 20%, respectively. Over the six-month period between the content audit and the implementation of the content management system, adjusting the process in anticipation of the

343

2005 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference Proceedings

CMS resulted in a savings of over $13,000 for two document types. See Table 1.

Table 1. Cost reduction for two document types Effort:Previousprocess

Cost Effort: Revisedprocess

Cost

Writer:440 hrs

$13,640 Writer: 260 hrs

$11,160

Savings: $2,480 per document

Writer:16 hrs

$620 Writer: 8 hrs $310

Illustrator:8 hrs

$264 Illustrator: 4 hrs

$132

Reviewers: 24 hrs

$840 Reviewers: 16 hrs

$560

Savings: $722 per document

Expectations Management

The recognition of content management as a strategic repositioning of the corporate infrastructure became the catalyst for other departments to examine how they manage their content. One realization is that the company creates two products; the primary product is dental equipment; the secondary product is information.

The leap from recognizing functional needs to looking for solutions resulted in the formation of a inter-department team to look at a corporate document management solution, with the CMS process being adapted for use on the DMS project.

Containing the scope is a related aspect of managing expectations for the CMS. On one hand, it is encouraging that departments such as engineering are starting to discuss content management concepts; on the other hand, the potential for scope creep is very present. To address the growing list of corporate issues that might be helped with some sort of content, data, or document management system is a temptation. The prioritization of organizational issues has been handled by acknowledging where a need for interoperability exists, and pushing these out to a

future project phase.

An ongoing challenge is to manage the expectations of line staff and management about the potential and the limitations of a CMS. As with any group that comes to the table with varying degrees of product familiarity, transferable conceptual knowledge, and individual pain points, the range of responses to content management was varied. We learned that the need to reiterate the benefits and logistics is ongoing. The adage of “explain seven times in seven different ways” is fitting, in that each explanation resonates differently with each team member and fills in the blanks for other colleagues. As well, educating C-level executives about the benefits of content management was critical, so they could filter information—the supportive, the skeptical, and the fantabulous—for the nuggets they needed to know.

Departmental Changes

Implementing new methods and systems in the organization pose certain change management challenges. The changes to be managed are in the control of the organization, but because these changes affect the familiarity of the work environment, some push-back continues to happen.

The response to changes over which individuals feel they have little or no control has been alleviated by teambuilding activities and encouraging team members to “air and share” concerns rather than letting them incubate. This also meant a change in corporate culture: from pushing information to line staff, to having them pull information to further their learning process.

One technique that proved to be quite effective was to show how content management systems worked from the “back end.” Such presentations allowed participants to reinforce explanations of the conceptual level by viewing the specifics of a CMS at the logistical level.

Conclusion

The greatest lesson learned was that the factors that can derail a content management project are many, and a number of them have nothing to do with technology. It is as important to manage the human side of the project as it is to manage the

344

2005 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference Proceedings

technical side. Slowing down the process and extending the timeline for the roadmap is preferable to maintaining a pace that causes adverse reactions in line staff or management.

The other lesson that bears repeating is that having a thorough understanding of business and technical requirements is critical. During the course of the project, we trained our sights in different directions, based on the requirements gathered to date. It was important to be able to change course when new requirements indicated that where we’d trained our sights was no longer practical.

About the Authors

Nina L. Junco manages the technical communications and technical training groups in A-dec’s Marketing Communications department. She is guiding her team as they establish a company policy for translating technical documents and eventual integration of these documents into an implementation of a content management system. Before joining A-dec, Ms. Junco worked primarily in the hardware and software industry for IBM, ITT, MKIRisk, and as a principal with Advanced Computer Consultants. She has a blended background in marketing, sales, training, and technical publications. Her area of interest is exploring how family systems therapy applies to corporate business structures.

Rahel Anne Bailie is the President of Intentional Design, Inc. Located in Vancouver, BC, Canada, Intentional Design Inc. is a technical communication consultancy focused on improving the performance of communication products. The strength of the organization lies in a “wildbrain” approach to performance improvement and its impact on the solutions provided to clients.

Rahel has been working as a consultant to A-dec, assisting in the implementation of a content management system. A-dec’s goal is to enable reuse of content in a myriad of documents, both printed and electronic. A major part of this goal is to improve the localization of A-dec documentation through better management of content and effective use of technology.

Denise Ledet is a technical writer in the Technical Communications group of A-dec’s Marketing Communications department. She has performed the role of a technical illustrator for 13 years at A-dec and has worked as a technical writer in the Marketing Communications department for 6 years. As a senior technical writer, Denise coordinates the localization of owners guides, service guides, and installation guides. Before coming to A-dec, Denise worked in manufacturing at Tektronix, Inc. and Quality Plastics, where she became interested in technical documentation and how it applies to manufacturing. Denise’s background includes experience in graphic illustration, training documentation, manufacturing instructions, and technical publications. Her areas of interest include building relationships and communication with people through youth and outreach programs and applying those skills as she builds relationships in the corporate world.

345