Miss an article? Archives
Saturday, March 04, 2006
By Brian Buehling, Managing Director, Dakota Systems
In recent years, there has been much debate on various approaches to solve the enterprise content management (ECM) and publishing problem. Initially, most of the discussion revolved around technical issues ranging from the selecting the best authoring tool to designing the optimal database schema to support workflow and versioning. However, as the set of content authoring, management and publishing tools has matured, the focus of discussion has shifted from what technical components are best for a project to how best to implement any given set of components. Further, looking back on the myriad of failed content management initiatives across the industry, common themes begin to shape that help explain the reasons for so many is guided projects.
Although selecting the right technology does increase the overall probability of success of an ECM system implementation, it is far from being the key contributing factor.Additionally, adopting a proven content technology process that leads an implementation team systematically through the requirements, design, development and testing of a new publishing system is no means a guarantee that a project will be deemed successful.
There have been countless attempts to identify the common thread that binds these ill fated initiatives. Topics like ‘Avoiding the Common Pitfalls of ECM Projects’, ‘Lessoned Learned from CMS Implementations’, ‘Top Ten Rules for Successfully Implementing CMS Projects’ highlight the shift from what tools are needed to how to implement them. Yet, even as the implementation processes mature in lock step with the CMS implementation tools one looming question remains: Why, still, do so many CMS initiatives fail?
After eliminating what technical components are chosen and how the chosen components are implemented all the remains is who implements them. As anyone familiar with ECM implementations can attest to, there is a common cast of characters swarming around every project team each with the potential to contribute to the team’s success or failure.
As the typical implementation team spends the vast majority of its time selecting technical components and learning new aspects of the CMS implementation process it has little time to collectively guard itself against the people lurking the shadows waiting for the opportunity to sabotage its project.
“There is no budget for this project.” - After months of evaluating, meeting, designing, testing and lobbying, right when the plan is completed, and the technology is selected, the words, ‘No Budget’ lead to the abrupt end of many projects. More times than not, this utterance alone from the Director of Finance is sufficient to stop a CMS initiative in its tracks.
Risks:
Mitigation Steps:
“That’s no problem, our software handles it” - The relationship with the sales manager is one of the most difficult to manage during a CMS implementation. If you don’t fully understand the limited of the proposed CMS technology you’re bound to set unattainable user expectations.
Risks:
Mitigation Steps:
“It’s not on our approved list of vendors” - Sooner or later your CMS solution will have to be integrated with your organization’s IT architecture. If there is a standard set of technology that is required it may be difficult to justify a CMS solution that deviates from it.
Risks:
Mitigation Steps:
“Just follow our 6 step Content Materialization Process and reusable content will materialize” - Although engaging CMS consultants for your implementation in some capacity is a good idea, you should be wary of deferring all of the key architecture and content modeling to them.
Risks:
Mitigation Plan:
“Don’t Forget Me” - Although you might rely heavily on external resources initially to design and implement your CMS, any successful system must a have a strong internal IT team to support and enhance the system over time.
Risks:
Mitigation Plan:
“Why can’t we just use MS-Word?” - A key set of users of any CMS is the technical writers. If they aren’t involved in the planning and design process, your project is headed for trouble.
Risks:
Mitigation Plan:
“Vo ist meine Content” - Today large-scale CMS’s typically involve managing content that support operations around the globe. Any user community that will require foreign language support must be identified before the project begins.
Risks:
Mitigation Plan:
Avoiding this dastardly group of saboteurs while adopting a reasonable implementation process and selecting one of the many industry proven technical platforms will get you off to a good start with your ECM project.
About the author - Brian Buehling is currently the Managing Director for Dakota Systems, a consulting firm specializing in XML-related technologies. Prior to Dakota, he worked in various capacities on content management systems for several companies including Facts and Comparisons, John Deere, and SBC Communications. His team’s decision support system at John Deere Health was selected as a Finalist for Business Intelligence Applications at Comdex/Window World Open 1997 and was nominated for the 1997 Smithsonian Award for innovation in information technology. He has earned a M.B.A. with concentrations in Finance and Strategy from the University of Chicago and a M.S. in Systems Science and Mathematics from Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri. Previously he was a visiting lecturer at Ohio University teaching business communication and computational theory.
More articles about Content Management : Tips for Success
blogINDIANA 2008: A Big Success (Well, Except For That Wireless Access Problem)
Non-profits and Schools Turn to Online Resource During Economic Downturn
Managing Small Content: Counting Characters
The Wisdom of Crowds Meets the Wisdom of Authors: How XML Enables the Semantic Web
NYK Europe: Wiki Keeps International Shipping Firm on Course
[Video] Font Conference: An Excellent Way To Waste Three Minutes and Have a Good Laugh

Get The Content Wrangler Newsletter delivered straight to your home or work Inbox. It's full of content goodness.