Slides from my tcworld 2015 talk about avoiding content management failures‚ or turning things around if your project's in danger of failing. Video of the presentation at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWtDcptwY7I
The abstract for the talk:
Many content management implementations encounter obstacles at some point. Some end as disasters. Others limp along, never quite realizing the promised benefits. However, failure is not inevitable. With teamwork and the right approach, existing projects can be turned around, and new projects can be launched in the right direction.
Using real-life examples, experience, and research, this presentation provides five activities that, combined, give content management initiatives the impetus and guidance to reach their destinations safely.
4. KPMG: IT project
management survey
In 12 months, 49% had
suffered a recent project
failure
Geneca: interviews
with 600 people in
software dev.
75% of project participants
lacked confidence that their
projects would succeed.
IT failures: typical stats
5. Content management
implementation failures
Industry statistics suggest that the odds of a successful project
are dismal at best.
– Lane Severson, Doculabs
50% or more CMS projects “fail” in some way:
botched implementations, soaring project costs, launch delays,
ruined SEO, and more…
– “The CMS Myth” blog
6. Kappelman’s 12 early
warnings of project failure
PEOPLE
Lack of top management support
Weak project manager
No stakeholder involvement
Weak commitment of project team
Team members lack knowledge
Subject matter experts are overscheduled
7. Kappelman’s 12 early
warnings of project failure
PEOPLE
Lack of top management support
Weak project manager
No stakeholder involvement
Weak commitment of project team
Team members lack knowledge
Subject matter experts are overscheduled
PROCESS
Lack of documented reqs
No change control process (change management)
Ineffective schedule management
Communication breakdown among stakeholders
Resources assigned to a higher priority project
No business case for the project
8. Kappelman’s 12 early
warnings of project failure
PEOPLE
Lack of top management support
Weak project manager
No stakeholder involvement
Weak commitment of project team
Team members lack knowledge
Subject matter experts are overscheduled
PROCESS
Lack of documented reqs
No change control process (change management)
Ineffective schedule management
Communication breakdown among stakeholders
Resources assigned to a higher priority project
No business case for the project
Even the
process-
related EWs
are mostly
about people
15. Risk: unrealistic goals due
to lack of knowledge
“It has ‘CMS’ in the name, so it can replace
Sharepoint or deliver web content”
“It’s built on a database, so it can manage our
parts list and BOM”
16. • Waning enthusiasm
• Other projects take priority
• New people come on board, wanting a
clean sweep
Risk: lack of support when
things get tough
22. The trouble with
(many) requirements
Mixing domains Authors must be able to add tables with
set templates in a responsive design
Utterly vague The solution must have built-in reporting
features
Assuming
implementation
details
The source document has to be
authored in one file to ensure
consistency
23. Consequences of bad
requirements
• Over-specced system (reducing budget for other important
work)
OR
• Co-opting a tool that’s designed for a different purpose
• Onerous workflows
• Attribute values and arbitrary markup details to remember
and enter manually
• Barely presentable outputs
28. Can you do more with the
tools you’ve got?
If considering a large revamp, consider first improving what you
have:
• Topic structures in Word/FM/ID templates?
• Use basic tools for authoring, version control, publishing
• Static site builder tech? (Jekyll / Pelican, etc.)
29. Can you do more with the
tools you’ve got?
If considering a large revamp, consider first improving what you
have:
• Topic structures in Word/FM/ID templates?
• Use basic tools for authoring, version control, publishing
• Static site builder tech? (Jekyll / Pelican, etc.)
If a big solution has been implemented, don’t chuck it out
(straightaway)
• What knowledge and skills have been gained?
• What can the tool usefully do (even if not up to original goals)?
39. Risks of no standards
Everyone doing things differently:
• Different tool configurations
• Inconsistent naming
• Different structures (element sequences)
• Arbitrary reuse
• Cloning documents/topics for any reason
40. Everyone doing things differently:
• Different tool configurations
• Inconsistent naming
• Different structures (element sequences)
• Arbitrary reuse
• Cloning documents/topics for any reason
Weakens all the benefits of content management: it’s expensive
and quality suffers
Risks of no standards
41. Setting standards
Centralized tool deployment
Naming conventions
Clear document structures/
topic types
Agreement on what can be
reused and how
42. Setting standards
Centralized tool deployment
Naming conventions
Clear document structures/
topic types
Agreement on what can be
reused and how
Flow chart / decision tree for
reuse decisions
43. Supporting standards
Support consistency with:
• Cleanup of existing content
(automated where possible)
• Name placeholders to type over?
• Pick lists for metadata
44. Supporting standards
Support consistency with:
• Cleanup of existing content
(automated where possible)
• Name placeholders to type over?
• Pick lists for metadata
• Just enough workflow. But make it visible!
45. Supporting standards
Support consistency with:
• Cleanup of existing content
(automated where possible)
• Name placeholders to type over?
• Pick lists for metadata
• Just enough workflow. But make it visible!
• Structure constraints and templates
46. Supporting standards
Support consistency with:
• Cleanup of existing content
(automated where possible)
• Name placeholders to type over?
• Pick lists for metadata
• Just enough workflow. But make it visible!
• Structure constraints and templates
• Visual indicators on reusable content
47. Monitoring standards
Foster small-group leaders
Reward suggestions for improvements to standards
• Visual recognition for a start
• Perhaps small material rewards such as vouchers
Meet regularly
Deliver quick actions on suggestions, or clear reasons not to
implement them