The 7 challenges of implementing a Content Management System

The term ‘double-edged sword’ may have been created with content management systems (CMS) in mind. On one hand, they hold great promise for organisations in terms of their ability to create and manage content that is more accurate, less costly to produce, and more consistent in appearance. On the other, they can present a myriad of challenges in their implementation and acceptance by the people using them – and purchasing them. Let’s examine the challenges that a CMS presents, along with ways those challenges can be overcome...

Challenge #1: Control & Management
Perhaps the primary challenge with managing content (which, for the purposes of this article, is defined as an organisation’s ‘human readable’ information, representing about 80% of a company’s total information base), is that there’s little or no control around creating it in the first place. Content is produced by a range of people at every level of an organisation, with usually no control mechanisms over it. Another issue is the way content has been managed over the years. A good example is financial information. Years ago people wrote their financials longhand on paper, then in ledgers.

This was followed by spreadsheet software, which simulated the written ledger in the way it looked. Soon thereafter, the 2nd generation of software arrived which allowed users to manipulate the information more creatively, followed by sophisticated financial management software.

This evolution of systems for financial information, which took place some 15-20 years ago, has not taken place for other content. In fact the majority of common tools to create content (e.g., Word, Frame, etc.) have never moved from the paper simulation stage. Word processors essentially replicated the function of typewriters, and while they have become more visual and feature-rich they’re fundamentally still doing the same thing: storing information as linear documents.

CMS’s have been instrumental in moving content creation out of the paper simulation phase into the database stage, which can’t be duplicated in a paper format.

Basically, it’s a revolution in the way content is managed and mirrors the evolution of financial software.

Challenge #2: Migration
Migrating an enterprise’s existing information into this new format, requires a big investment in time and labour as the sheer volume of content is overwhelming in comparison to what it would have been 20 years ago at the time financial information was being converted. And as this content represents 80% of an organisation’s data, the importance of the migration phase cannot be overestimated. In the end, migration requires a technology solution with some CMS’s more adept at allowing people to import content quickly, and in popular formats. Unfortunately, successful migration involves other factors, specifically the formatting of the original document.

The less structured a document, the more difficult it is to import it into the CMS. For example, a manual created by a writer in the technical publications department will be relatively straightforward, since most technical writers are meticulous about style and formatting. But a manual written by a different department may present a different set of issues.

We’ve seen documents created by HR, for instance, in which the writer came to the end of a line, hit the Return key, and then used the spacebar to line up the next paragraph.

Importing a manual with this lack of style involves much more labour and effort. CMS vendors without advanced migration capabilities may well propose that a company simply create all new content.

But having already invested millions of dollars in their content, organisations cannot be expected to give it up lightly. Of course, many of the same vendors are willing to provide migration assistance at a substantial cost – sometimes as much as $15 a page.

One way around this is to migrate only the content that is absolutely necessary. Ie: don’t migrate manuals for products that are no longer manufactured or for procedures that have been discarded.

The amount of content that can be left on the side of the road is often quite voluminous.

Challenge #3: Gaining Approval
The approval process for a CMS is an all-too-familiar barrier. While budget concerns might be raised the real obstacle is convincing people that there’s a good business case for a CMS. Often it’s a generational issue: many older executives simply don’t see the value of managing information and the only types of arguments that are considered involve hard ROI. Sometimes this is readily evident (where there is a high volume of customer-facing content), but if the issue is just making life easier, gaining internal approval can be difficult.

The answer? Obviously, where there is a good deal of customer-facing content or translation, the case can be made easily. But where neither item is a factor, the case should be made through the value of producing content that is consistent, graphically uniform, and ultimately quicker to create.

Challenge #4: The People Factor
In our experience, the main competitor for a CMS is not really another vendor, it’s apathy. Often, people who use MS Word to create their documents are comfortable using it and don’t care enough to try anything else – even if another program is more suitable for managing content.

The only areas of the company for which change is desirable are those where the pain of creating and managing content is particularly strong, such as product documentation – driven by deadlines, quality and other factors which typically don’t affect many other departments.

Sometimes the opposite is true. Executives frequently ask how the CMS can help on a more company-wide basis, while writers wonder how it can help them specifically. Often the true benefits of a CMS are realised downstream from the actual writing (workers from different departments drawing on each other’s work, greater consistency and efficiency).

Getting writers to alter the way they work purely for the sake of others can be a hard road to hoe. In the end, the CMS is a two-part sell: the CMS vendor must demonstrate value to the organisation at large and to the individual as well. It’s critical that every person in the process sees some improvement in the way they work.

Challenge #5: Fear of Obsolescence
Another people challenge is personality problems with individuals who’ve played crucial roles because of their expertise. The one person everyone comes to when they have a problem, for example. Once a CMS has been implemented, that person is generally not required anymore because work isn’t performed in the same fashion. So there can be issues from people who feel a growing obsolescence as their power base erodes.

How is this obstacle overcome? The fact is, many times it’s not. Often, these people must be left behind in order for a better system to take hold. Other times, however, it is possible to make the person ‘indispensable’ in a different area.

Challenge #6: Document Ownership
Problems occur with people who are accustomed to working on a document by themselves. When the transition is made to a CMS, it’s a team sport. Many times, the writers in an organisation, who may collectively be viewed as a team, actually share nothing more than a location.

They may consult with each other about writing guidelines, but when it comes to the actual writing, writer A works on Manual A and someone else on Manual B. When moving into a CMS, especially the component-based variety, you immediately have components you need to share, so a person’s manual isn’t really ‘theirs’ – the effort of all the individuals contributes to it. This can create a barrier because an individual may feel threatened, or others think they’re superior writers and don’t want other people’s substandard work gumming up their labour! What some writers fail to realise is that this process can help them focus on a specific niche in which they have particular expertise. We’ve found people who might be writing entire manuals but they have a particular aptitude for writing procedures.

A good CMS will allow them to concentrate on their specialty. Creating documents in a CMS also necessitates that the users display flexibility. Writers are used to working on their documents when and where they want. When the move is made to a CMS, it’s not as simple. The document is stored in a centralised system made up of thousands of components which can create problems of access from remote locations. However, new Web-based systems do help resolve that issue. In terms of personnel problems, the most effective remedy is education. Consultation with the team, involving the individuals in the process and not just dictating to them that they will use this product – getting them excited – is critical.

Explain that this is the way of the future, that they can increase their job skills and solidify their job security. There will always be some who will leave because they’re unwilling to go along, but that’s the price a company pays for advancing its technological capabilities.

Challenge #7: The IT Department
If a specific CMS product doesn’t fit the current ‘buzz’ of the ideal technical solution, IT can get in the way. Reluctance also comes from the fact that IT is sometimes unwilling to support or install software on the desk-top in larger enterprises because they don’t want another piece of software requiring support. The good news is that new Web-based CMS products are a real boon in this area, since the application simply requires installation on the company servers.

Plus, typically, IT departments are quite supportive of Web-based applications. But the real key is to involve IT as early as possible in the process, getting their buy-in on the specific CMS product. In the end, there are few obstacles or challenges for which education and training are not the key – not just product training but training in how to write in a component-based fashion. Some CMS vendors will offer this type of training, while others require you to find a third-party solution.

Some vendors even run ‘train-the-trainer’ programs to continue training in-house once the CMS implementation is complete. However, there has to be management buy-in, not just monetarily but from the perspective of continuous improvement. Management has to provide all of the requisite support and must remain focused on getting results so that the entire company is motivated to achieve the corporate goals – together.

8/1/30_ex_m_h_nl